REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC

20.12.2021 - (COM(2020)0825 – C9-0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD)) - ***I

Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection
Rapporteur: Christel Schaldemose
Rapporteurs for the opinion (*):
Henna Virkkunen, Committee on Industry, Research and Energy
Geoffroy Didier, Committee on Legal Affairs
Patrick Breyer, Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
(*) Associated committees – Rule 57 of the Rules of Procedure

Amendments

• 001-457 (PDF - 586 KB)
• 001-457 (DOC - 217 KB)
• 458-467 (PDF - 137 KB)
• 458-467 (DOC - 21 KB)
• 468-473 (PDF - 131 KB)
• 468-473 (DOC - 16 KB)
• 474-477 (PDF - 117 KB)
• 474-477 (DOC - 78 KB)
• 478-481 (PDF - 111 KB)
• 478-481 (DOC - 76 KB)
• 482-484 (PDF - 129 KB)
• 482-484 (DOC - 13 KB)
• 485-492 (PDF - 122 KB)
• 485-492 (DOC - 18 KB)
• 493-497 (PDF - 128 KB)
• 493-497 (DOC - 15 KB)
• 498-499 (PDF - 115 KB)
• 498-499 (DOC - 12 KB)
• 500-500 (PDF - 107 KB)
• 500-500 (DOC - 73 KB)
• 501-504 (PDF - 109 KB)
• 501-504 (DOC - 77 KB)
• 505-508 (PDF - 103 KB)
• 505-508 (DOC - 76 KB)
• 509-514 (PDF - 156 KB)
• 509-514 (DOC - 21 KB)
• 515-515 (PDF - 110 KB)
• 515-515 (DOC - 73 KB)
• 516-516 (PDF - 110 KB)
• 516-516 (DOC - 10 KB)
• 517-519/REV1 (PDF - 122 KB)
• 517-519/REV1 (DOC - 82 KB)
• 517-521 (PDF - 135 KB)
• 517-521 (DOC - 88 KB)
• 520-521/REV1 (PDF - 116 KB)
• 520-521/REV1 (DOC - 75 KB)
• 522-523 (PDF - 113 KB)
• 522-523 (DOC - 75 KB)
• 522-526 (PDF - 120 KB)
• 522-526 (DOC - 79 KB)
• 524-526/REV1 (PDF - 109 KB)
• 524-526/REV1 (DOC - 76 KB)
• 527-531 (PDF - 121 KB)
• 527-531 (DOC - 79 KB)
• 532-533/REV1 (PDF - 100 KB)
• 532-533/REV1 (DOC - 74 KB)
• 532-541 (PDF - 131 KB)
• 532-541 (DOC - 86 KB)
• 534-541 (PDF - 128 KB)
• 534-541 (DOC - 82 KB)
• 542-546 (PDF - 114 KB)
• 542-546 (DOC - 72 KB)
• 547-551 (PDF - 123 KB)
• 547-551 (DOC - 80 KB)
• 552-556 (PDF - 118 KB)
• 552-556 (DOC - 78 KB)
• 557-563 (PDF - 127 KB)
• 557-563 (DOC - 82 KB)
• 562-562/REV1 (PDF - 105 KB)
• 562-562/REV1 (DOC - 72 KB)
• 564-564 (PDF - 662 KB)
• 564-564 (DOC - 208 KB)
• 565-565 (PDF - 103 KB)
• 565-565 (DOC - 70 KB)

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC

(COM(2020)0825 – C9-0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0825),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9-0418/2020,

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 27 April 2021[1],

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 1 July 2021[2],

– having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to opinions of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Legal Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A9-0356/2021),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

 

Amendment  1

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council25 , new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and marketplaces, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel ways. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks and challenges, both for individual users and for society as a whole.	(1) Information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council25 , new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and marketplaces, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel and innovative ways, transforming their communication, consumption and business habits. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks and challenges, for individual users, companies and for society as a whole.
__________________	__________________
25 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).	25 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).

Amendment  2

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services. Those diverging national laws negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice.	(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services, and resulting in a fragmentation of the internal market. Those diverging national laws negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice, without lock-in effects, and reducing administrative burden for intermediary services, especially for micro, small and medium sized enterprises.

Amendment  3

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and the right to non-discrimination.	(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the rights to privacy, to protection of personal data, respect for human dignity, private and family life, the freedom of expression and information, the freedom and the pluralism of the media,and the freedom to conduct a business, a high level of consumer protection, the equality between women and men and the right to non-discrimination. Children have particular rights enshrined in Article 24 of the Charter and in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). As such, the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration in all matters affecting them. The UNCRC General comment No. 25 on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment formally sets out how these rights apply to the digital world.

Amendment  4

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.	(4) 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, protecting consumers and fostering interoperability. By using requirements that are technology neutral, innovation should not be hampered but instead be stimulated, while respecting fundamental rights.

Amendment  5

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(4a) Given the importance of digital services, it is essential that this Regulation ensures a regulatory framework which ensures full, equal and unrestricted access to intermediary services for all recipients of services, including persons with disabilities. Therefore, it is important that accessibility requirements for intermediary services, including their user interfaces, are consistent with existing Union law, such as the European Accessibility Act and the Web Accessibility Directive and that Union law is further developed, so that no one is left behind as result of digital innovation.

Amendment  6

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6) In practice, certain providers of intermediary services intermediate in relation to services that may or may not be provided by electronic means, such as remote information technology services, transport, accommodation or delivery services. This Regulation should apply only to intermediary services and not affect requirements set out in Union or national law relating to products or services intermediated through intermediary services, including in situations where the intermediary service constitutes an integral part of another service which is not an intermediary service as specified in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.	(6) In practice, certain providers of intermediary services intermediate in relation to services that may or may not be provided by electronic means, such as remote information technology services, transport of persons and goods, accommodation or delivery services. This Regulation should apply only to intermediary services and not affect requirements set out in Union or national law relating to products or services intermediated through intermediary services, including in situations where the intermediary service constitutes an integral part of another service which is not an intermediary service as specified in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Amendment  7

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.	(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the directing of activities towards one or more Member States. The directing of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The directing of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.
__________________	__________________
27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).	27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).

Amendment  8

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. However, the rules of this Regulation apply in respect of issues that are not or not fully addressed by those other acts as well as issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures at national level.	(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) 2021/784 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. However, the rules of this Regulation should apply in respect of issues that are not or not fully addressed by those other acts as well as issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures. To assist Member States and service providers, the Commission should provide guidelines as to how to interpret the interaction and complementary nature between different Union legal acts and this Regulation and how to prevent any duplication of requirements on providers or potential conflicts in the interpretation of similar requirements. In particular, the guidelines should clarify any potential conflicts between the conditions and obligations laid down in legal acts, referred to in this Regulation, explaining which legal act should prevail.
__________________	__________________
28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .	28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .
29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation	29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation

Amendment  9

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(9a) In line with Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, cultural aspects should be taken into account, in particular in order to respect and to promote the cultural and linguistic diversity. It is essential that this Regulation contributes to protect the freedom of expression and information, media freedom and to foster media pluralism as well as cultural and linguistic diversity.

Amendment  10

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33 as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union law on working conditions.	(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33, Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council33a, as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation(EU) 2019/1020, Directive2001/95/EC, Directive 2013/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation 2017/239437a , and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union or national law on working conditions.
__________________	__________________
30 Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1).	30 Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1).
31 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).	31 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).
32 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.	32 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.
33 Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC.	33 Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC.
	33a Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast)
34 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)	34 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)
35 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.	35 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.
36 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts.	36 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts.
37 Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules	37 Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules
	37a Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004
38 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).	38 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

Amendment  11

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.	(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.

Amendment  12

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood 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.	(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should underpin the general idea that what is illegal offline should also be illegal online. The concept of “illegal content” should be defined appropriately and should cover information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable Union or national law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech, or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that is not in compliance with Union law since it refers 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, illegal trading of animals, plants and substances, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law, the provision of illegal services in particular in the area of accommodation services on short-term rental platforms non-compliant with Union or national 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 in conformity with Union law, including the Charter and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question.

Amendment  13

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of another service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.	(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor or a purely ancillary feature of another service or functionality of the principal service and that feature or functionality cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature or functionality is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher. For the purposes of this Regulation, cloud computing services should not be considered to be an online platform in cases where allowing the dissemination of specific content constitutes a minor or ancillary feature. Moreover, cloud computing services, when serving as infrastructure, for example, as the underlining infrastructural storage and computing services of an internet-based application or online platform, should not in itself be seen as disseminating to the public information stored or processed at the request of a recipient of an application or online platform which it hosts.

Amendment  14

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a finite number of pre-determined persons. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information.	(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. Accordingly, where access to information requires registration or admittance to a group of users, that information should be considered to have been disseminated to the public only where users seeking to access the information are automatically registered or admitted without a human decision on whom to grant access. Information exchanged using interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, are not considered to have been disseminated to the public. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information.
__________________	__________________
39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36	39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36

Amendment  15

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16) The legal certainty provided by the horizontal framework of conditional exemptions from liability for providers of intermediary services, laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC, has allowed many novel services to emerge and scale-up across the internal market. That framework should therefore be preserved. However, in view of the divergences when transposing and applying the relevant rules at national level, and for reasons of clarity and coherence, that framework should be incorporated in this Regulation. It is also necessary to clarify certain elements of that framework, having regard to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.	(16) The legal certainty provided by the horizontal framework of conditional exemptions from liability for providers of intermediary services, laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC, has allowed many novel services to emerge and scale-up across the internal market. That framework should therefore be preserved. However, in view of the divergences when transposing and applying the relevant rules at national level, and for reasons of clarity, consistency, predictability, accessibility and coherence, that framework should be incorporated in this Regulation. It is also necessary to clarify certain elements of that framework, having regard to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as technological and market developments.

Amendment  16

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.	(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. The mere ranking or displaying in an order, or the use of a recommender system should not, however, be deemed as having control over an information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.

Amendment  17

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) A provider of intermediary services that deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities does not provide its service neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.	(20) Where a provider of intermediary services deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities, the service should be deemed not to have been provided neutrally and the provider should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.

Amendment  18

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved with the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.	(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved in the content of the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature, which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.

Amendment  19

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 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.	(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, after having become aware of the illegal nature of the content and thus obtaining actual knowledge or awareness, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of a high level of consumer protection and of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the principle of freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority. The provider can obtain actual knowledge or awareness of the illegal nature of the content through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent hosting service provider to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content. As long as providers act upon obtaining actual knowledge, they should benefit from the exemptions from liability referred to in this Regulation.

Amendment  20

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.	(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of a consumer. Such a belief may arise, for example, where the online platform allowing distance contracts with traders fails to display clearly the identity of the trader pursuant to this Regulation, or is marketing the product or service in its own name rather than using the name of the trader who will supply it, or where the provider determines the final price of the goods or services offered by the trader.

Amendment  21

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 25

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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.	(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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, solely because they are carrying out voluntary own-initiative investigations, provided those activities are carried out in good faith and in a diligent manner and are accompanied with additional safeguards against over-removal of legal content. Providers of intermediary services should make best efforts to ensure that where automated tools are used for content moderation, the technology is sufficiently reliable to limit to the maximum extent possible the rate of errors where information is wrongly considered as illegal content. 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  22

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 26

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(26) Whilst the rules in Chapter II of this Regulation concentrate on the exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services, it is important to recall that, despite the generally important role played by those providers, the problem of illegal content and activities online should not be dealt with by solely focusing on their liability and responsibilities. Where possible, third parties affected by illegal content transmitted or stored online should attempt to resolve conflicts relating to such content without involving the providers of intermediary services in question. Recipients of the service should be held liable, where the applicable rules of Union and national law determining such liability so provide, for the illegal content that they provide and may disseminate through intermediary services. Where appropriate, other actors, such as group moderators in closed online environments, in particular in the case of large groups, should also help to avoid the spread of illegal content online, in accordance with the applicable law. Furthermore, where it is necessary to involve information society services providers, including providers of intermediary services, any requests or orders for such involvement should, as a general rule, be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, so as to prevent and minimise any possible negative effects for the availability and accessibility of information that is not illegal content.	(26) Whilst the rules in Chapter II of this Regulation concentrate on the exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services, it is important to recall that, despite the generally important role played by those providers, the problem of illegal content and activities online should not be dealt with by solely focusing on their liability and responsibilities. Where possible, third parties affected by illegal content transmitted or stored online should attempt to resolve conflicts relating to such content without involving the providers of intermediary services in question. Recipients of the service should be held liable, where the applicable rules of Union and national law determining such liability so provide, for the illegal content that they provide and may disseminate through intermediary services. Where appropriate, other actors, such as group moderators in closed and open online environments, in particular in the case of large groups, should also help to avoid the spread of illegal content online, in accordance with the applicable law. Furthermore, where it is necessary to involve information society services providers, including providers of intermediary services, any requests or orders for such involvement should, as a general rule, be directed to the specific provider that has the technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, so as to prevent and minimise any possible negative effects for the availability and accessibility of information that is not illegal content. Consequently providers should act where they are in the best place to do so.

Amendment  23

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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 that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.	(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 and among others, wireless local area networks, domain name system (DNS) services, top–level domain name registries, certificate authorities that issue digital certificates, Virtual Private Networks, cloud infrastructure services, or content delivery networks, that enable or improve the functions of other providers of intermediary services. 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 that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.

Amendment  24

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(27a) A single webpage or website may include elements that qualify differently between ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting services and the rules for exemptions from liability should apply to each accordingly. For example, a search engine could act solely as a ‘caching’ service as to information included in the results of an inquiry. Elements displayed alongside those results, such as online advertisements, would however still qualify as a hosting service.

Amendment  25

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content.	(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation, neither de jure, nor de facto with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern specific and properly identified monitoring obligations in a specific case, where set out in Union acts and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation that implement Union legal acts, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation and other Union law considered as lex specialis. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content. Equally, Member States should not prevent providers of intermediary services from providing end-to-end encrypted services. Applying effective end-to-end encryption to data is essential for trust in and security on the Internet, and effectively prevents unauthorised third party access. Furthermore, to ensure effective digital privacy, Member States should not impose a general obligation on providers of intermediary services to limit the anonymous use of their services.

Amendment  26

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 29

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the processing of those orders.	(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws in conformity with Union law, including the Charter on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the effective processing of those orders.

Amendment  27

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.	(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, including the Charter and in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) 2021/784 on addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online, or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.

Amendment  28

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity.	(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law in conformity with Union law, including Directive 2000/31/EC and the Charter, enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. Exceptionally, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity.

Amendment  29

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 32

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(32) The orders to provide information regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. Therefore, orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information.	(32) The orders to provide information regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. Therefore, orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information. Member States should ensure full implementation of the Union legal framework on confidentiality of communications and online privacy, as well as on protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data enshrined in Directive (EU) 2016/680. In particular, Member States should respect the rights of individuals and journalists and refrain from seeking information which could harm media freedom or freedom of expression.

Amendment  30

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.	(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information, as defined in Union or national law in compliance with Union law, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they should not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. The competent authority should transmit the orders to act against illegal content and to provide information directly to the relevant addressee by any electronic means capable of producing a written record under conditions that allow the service provider to establish authenticity, including the accuracy of the date and the time of sending and receipt of the order, such as by secured email and platforms or other secured channels, including those made available by the service provider, in line with the rules protecting personal data. This requirement should notably be met by the use of qualified electronic registered delivery services as provided for by Regulation (EU) 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council. This Regulation should be without prejudice to the rules on the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgements, namely as regards the right to refuse recognition and enforcement of an order to act against illegal content, in particular where such an order is contrary to the public policy in the Member State where recognition or enforcement is sought.

Amendment  31

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(33a) This Regulation should not prevent the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, to issue an order to restore content, where such content has been in compliance with the terms and conditions of the intermediary service provider, but has been erroneously considered as illegal by the service provider and has been removed.

Amendment  32

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(33b) To ensure the effective implementation of this Regulation, orders to act against illegal content and to provide information should comply with Union law, including with the Charter. The Commission should provide an effective response to breaches of Union law through infringement proceedings.

Amendment  33

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 34

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.	(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear, effective, predictable and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as a high level of consumer protection, the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, the protection of relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, the meaningful accountability of those providers and the empowerment of recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.

Amendment  34

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 35

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(35) In that regard, it is important that the due diligence obligations are adapted to the type and nature of the intermediary service concerned. This Regulation therefore sets out basic obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services, as well as additional obligations for providers of hosting services and, more specifically, online platforms and very large online platforms. To the extent that providers of intermediary services may fall within those different categories in view of the nature of their services and their size, they should comply with all of the corresponding obligations of this Regulation. Those harmonised due diligence obligations, which should be reasonable and non-arbitrary, are needed to achieve the identified public policy concerns, such as safeguarding the legitimate interests of the recipients of the service, addressing illegal practices and protecting fundamental rights online.	(35) In that regard, it is important that the due diligence obligations are adapted to the type, nature and size of the intermediary service concerned. This Regulation therefore sets out basic obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services, as well as additional obligations for providers of hosting services and, more specifically, online platforms and very large online platforms. To the extent that providers of intermediary services may fall within those different categories in view of the nature of their services and their size, they should comply with all of the corresponding obligations of this Regulation in relation to those services. Those harmonised due diligence obligations, which should be reasonable and non-arbitrary, are needed to achieve the identified public policy concerns, such as safeguarding the legitimate interests of the recipients of the service, addressing illegal practices and protecting fundamental rights online.

Amendment  35

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .	(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to designate a single point of contact and to publish relevant and up to date information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. Such information should be notified to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State of establishment. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. It should be possible that this contact point is the same contact point as required under other Union acts. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location.

Amendment  36

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(36a) Providers of intermediary services should also be required to designate a single point of contact for recipients of services, which allows rapid, direct and efficient communication in particular by easily accessible means such as telephone number, email addresses, electronic contact forms, chatbots or instant messaging. It should be explicitly indicated when a user communicates with chatbots. To facilitate rapid, direct and efficient communication, recipients of services should not be faced with lengthy phone menus or hidden contact information. In particular, phone menus should always include the option to speak to a human. Providers of intermediary services should allow recipients of services to choose means of direct and efficient communication which do not solely rely on automated tools. This requirement should not affect the internal organisation of providers of intermediary services, including the ability to use third-party services to provide this communication system, such as external service providers and call centres.

Amendment  37

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with.	(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with. It should be possible that a legal representative is mandated by more than one provider of intermediary services, in accordance with national law, provided that such providers qualify as micro, small or medium sized enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC.

Amendment  38

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes.	(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of protecting fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression and of information, transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of discriminatory, unfair or arbitrary outcomes. In particular, it is important to ensure that terms and conditions are drafted in a clear and unambiguous language in line with applicable Union and national law. The terms and conditions should include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making, human review, as well as on the right to terminate the use of the service. Providers of intermediary services should also provide recipients of services with a concise and easily readable summary of the main elements of the terms and conditions, including the remedies available, using, where appropriate graphical elements, such as icons.

Amendment  39

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should annually report, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.40	(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should draw up an annual report in a standardised and machine-readable format, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC 40 which do not also qualify as very large online platforms.
__________________	__________________
40 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).	40 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  40

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(39a) Recipients of a service should be able to make a free, autonomous and informed decisions or choices when using a service and providers of intermediary services shall not use any means, including via its interface, to distort or impair that decision-making. In particular, recipients of the service should be empowered to make such decision sinter alia regarding the acceptance of and changes to terms and conditions, advertising practices, privacy and other settings, recommender systems when interacting with intermediary services. However, certain practices typically exploit cognitive biases and prompt recipients of the service to purchase goods and services that they do not want or to reveal personal information they would prefer not to disclose. Therefore, providers of intermediary services should be prohibited from deceiving or nudging recipients of the service and from distorting or impairing the autonomy, decision-making, or choice of the recipients of the service via the structure, design or functionalities of an online interface or a part thereof (‘dark patterns’). This should include, but should not be limited to, exploitative design choices to direct the recipient to actions that benefit the provider of intermediary services, but which may not be in the recipients’ interests, presenting choices in a non-neutral manner, such as giving more visual prominence to a consent option, repetitively requesting or urging the recipient to make a decision such as making the procedure of cancelling a service significantly more cumbersome than signing up to it. However, rules preventing dark patterns should not be understood as preventing providers to interact directly with users and to offer new or additional services to them. In particular it should be possible to approach a user again in a reasonable time, even if the user had denied consent for specific data processing purposes, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The Commission should be empowered to adopt a delegated act to define practices that could be considered as dark patterns.

Amendment  41

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.	(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place easily accessible, comprehensive and user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can establish that the content in question is clearly illegal without additional legal or factual examination of the information indicated in the notice and remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Such mechanism should include a clearly identifiable reporting mechanism, located close to the content in question allowing to notify quickly and easily items of information considered to be illegal content under Union or national law. Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice in order to ensure the effective operation of notice and action mechanisms. While individuals should always be able to submit notices anonymously, such notices should not give rise to actual knowledge, except in the case of information considered to involve one of the offences referred to in Directive 2011/93/EU. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.

Amendment  42

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(40a) Nevertheless, notices should be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act and the closest relationship to the recipient of the service that provided the information or content. Such hosting service providers should redirect such notices to the particular online platform and inform the Digital Services Coordinator.

Amendment  43

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(40b) Moreover, hosting providers should seek to act only against the items of information notified. Where the removal or disabling of access to individual items of information is technically or operationally unachievable due to legal or technological reasons, such as encrypted file and data storage and sharing services, hosting providers should inform the recipient of the service of the notification and seek action.

Amendment  44

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 41

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.	(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent objective, non-arbitrary and non-discriminatory processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.

Amendment  45

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 41 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(41a) Providers of hosting services should act upon notices without undue delay, taking into account the type of illegal content that is being notified and the urgency of taking action. The provider of hosting services should inform the individual or entity notifying the specific content of its decision without undue delay after taking a decision whether to act upon the notice or not.

Amendment  46

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.	(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove, disable access to, demote or impose other measures with regard to information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that have been proven to be efficient, proportionate and accurate, that provider should in a clear and user-friendly manner inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress. The obligation should however not apply in a number of situations, namely when the content is deceptive or part of high-volume of commercial content, or when it has been requested by a judicial or law enforcement authority to not inform the recipient due to an ongoing criminal investigation until the criminal investigation is closed. Where a provider of hosting service does not have the information necessary to inform the recipient by a durable medium, it should not be required to do so.

Amendment  47

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(42a) A provider of hosting services 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 commit a serious criminal offence involving an imminent threat to the life or safety of person, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1. In such instances, the provider of hosting services should inform without delay the competent law enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing, upon their request, all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion and unless instructed otherwise, should remove or disable the content. The information notified by the hosting service provider should not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified. 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 provider of hosting services. Providers of hosting services 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. In order to facilitate the notification of suspicions of criminal offenses, Member States should notify to the Commission the list of the competent law enforcement or judicial authorities.
	__________________
	1 Directive 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  48

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43a) Similarly, in order to ensure that the obligations are only applied to those providers of intermediary services where the benefit would outweigh the burden on the provider, the Commission should be empowered to issue a waiver to the requirements of Chapter III Section 3, in whole or in parts, to those providers of intermediary services that are non-for profit t, or are medium-sized enterprises, but do not present any systemic risk related to illegal content and have limited exposure to illegal content. The providers should present justified reasons for why they should be issued a waiver and send their application first to their Digital Services Coordinators of establishment for a preliminary assessment. The Commission should examine such an application taking into account a preliminary assessment carried out by the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment. The preliminary assessment should be sent together with the application to the Commission. The Commission should monitor the application of the waiver and have the right revoke a waiver at any time. The Commission should maintain a public list of all waiver issued and their conditions.

Amendment  49

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 44

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost-effective manner. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.	(44) Recipients of the service, should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions, of online platforms that negatively affect them. This should include decisions of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders to suspend the provisions of their services to traders. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift, non-discriminatory, non-arbitrary and fair outcomes within ten working days starting on the date on which the online platform received the complaint. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of entering, in good faith, an out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost-effective manner and within a reasonable period of time. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.

Amendment  50

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 46

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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	(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, acting within their designated area of expertise, through the notice and action mechanisms required by this Regulation are treated with priority, and expeditiously, taking into account due process and without prejudice to the requirement to process and decide upon all notices submitted under those mechanisms in an objective manner. Such trusted flagger status should only be awarded, for a period of two years, 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 and have transparent funding structure. The Digital Services Coordinator should be allowed to renew the status where the trusted flagger concerned continues to meet the requirements of this Regulation. 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, consumer 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. Trusted flaggers should publish easily comprehensible and detailed reports on notices submitted in accordance with Article 14. Those reports should indicate information such as notices categorised by the entity of the provider of hosting services, the type of content notified, the legal provisions allegedly breached by the content in question, and the action taken by the provider. The reports should also include information about any potential conflict of interest and sources of funding as well as the procedure put in place by the trusted flagger to retain its independence. 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 and respect for exceptions and limitations to intellectual property rights. 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 In order to avoid abuses of the status of trusted flagger, it should be possible to suspend such status when a Digital Service Coordinator of establishment opened an investigation based on legitimate reasons. The suspension should not be longer than the time needed to conduct the investigation and should be maintained if the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment concluded that the entity in question could still be considered as a trusted flagger.
__________________	__________________
43 Regulation (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	43 Regulation (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  51

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 46 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(46a) The strict application of universal design to all new technologies and services should ensure full, equal and unrestricted access for all potential consumers, including persons with disabilities, in a way that takes full account of their inherent dignity and diversity. It is essential to ensure that providers of online platforms, which offer services in the Union, design and provide those services in accordance with the accessibility requirements, set out in Directive (EU) 2019/882. In particular, providers of online platforms should ensure that information provided, forms provided and procedures that are in place are made available in a manner that they are easy to find, easy to understand, and accessible to persons with disabilities.

Amendment  52

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 47

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.	(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate, proportionate and effective safeguards against such misuse. The misuse of services of online platforms could be established with regard to frequently provided illegal content where it is evident that that content is illegal without conducting a detailed legal or factual analysis. Notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should be entitled to temporarily or, in a limited number of situations, permanently suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.

Amendment  53

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 48

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. In such instances, the online platform should inform without delay the competent law enforcement 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.	deleted
___________
1 Directive 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  54

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 49

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential information to the online platform, including for purposes of promoting messages on or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online platforms should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.	(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders should obtain additional information on the trader and the products and services they intend to offer on the platform. The online platform should therefore be required to obtain information on the name, telephone number and electronic mail of the economic operator and the type of product or service the trader intends to offer on the online platform. Prior to offering its services to the trader, the online platform operator should make best efforts to assess if the information provided by the trader is reliable. In addition, the platform should take adequate measures, such as where applicable, random checks, to identify and prevent illegal content from appearing on their interface. The fulfilment of the obligations on traceability of the traders, products and services should facilitate the compliance by platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with the obligation to inform consumers of the identity of their contracting party established under Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, as well as the obligations established under Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 as regards the Member State in which consumers can pursue their consumer rights. The requirement to provide essential information should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online platforms should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary and no longer than six months after the end of a relationship with the trader, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a direct legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.

Amendment  55

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online platforms covered should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the online platforms covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online platforms, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such online platforms should also design and organise their online interface in a way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 .	(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online platforms covered should, before allowing the display of the product or services on its online interface, make reasonable efforts to assess the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the online platforms covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online platforms, which have made the best efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such online platforms should also design and organise their online interface in a user-friendly way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 .
__________________	__________________
45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en	45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en
46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council	46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)	47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)
48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers	48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers

Amendment  56

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(50a) Online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders should demonstrate their best efforts to prevent the dissemination by traders of illegal products and services, in compliance with the no general monitoring principle. Online platforms covered should inform recipients when the service or product they have acquired through their services are illegal.

Amendment  57

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 52

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.	(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. New advertising models have generated changes in the way information is presented and have created new personal data collection patterns and business models that might affect privacy, personal autonomy, democracy, quality news reporting and facilitate manipulation and discrimination. Therefore, more transparency in online advertising markets and independent research needs to be carried out to assess the effectiveness of behavioural advertisements. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed, as well as the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement. In addition, recipients of the service should have easy access to information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein. In addition to these information obligations, online platforms should ensure that recipients of the service can refuse or withdraw their consent for targeted advertising purposes, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in a way that is not more difficult nor time-consuming than to give their consent. Online platforms should also not use personal data for commercial purposes related to direct marketing, profiling and behaviourally targeted advertising of minors. The online platform should not be obliged to maintain, acquire or process additional information in order to assess the age of the recipient of the service.

Amendment  58

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 52 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(52a) A core part of an online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, online platforms should ensure that recipients can understand how recommender system impact the way information is displayed, and can influence how information is presented to them. They should clearly present the parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them.

Amendment  59

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 53

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.	(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, there being no proportionate alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.

Amendment  60

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 54

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.	(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means. Accordingly, the number of average monthly recipients of the service should reflect the recipients actually reached by the service either by being exposed to content or by providing content disseminated on the platforms’ interface in that period of time.

Amendment  61

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 56

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures.	(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures where mitigation is possible without adversely impacting fundamental rights.

Amendment  62

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 57

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.	(57) Four categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination and amplification of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including dangerous and counterfeit products and illegally-traded animals. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the actual and foreseeable impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, freedom of the press, human dignity, the right to private life, the right to gender equality, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions. A fourth category of risks concerns any actual and foreseeable negative effects on the protection of public health, including behavioural addictions due to excessive use of a service or other serious negative effects to the person's physical, mental, social and financial well-being.

Amendment  63

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 58

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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.	(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment where mitigation is possible without adversely impacting fundamental rights. 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 and of content that is incompatible with their terms and conditions. They should also consider mitigation measures in case of malfunctioning or intentional manipulation and exploitation of the service, or in case of risks inherent to the intended operation of the service, including the amplification of illegal content, of content that is in breach with their terms and conditions or any other content having negative effects, by adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions and content moderation policies and how those policies are enforced, while being fully transparent to the recipients of the service. 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. 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. The decision as to the choice of measures should remain with the very large online platform. 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. The Commission should evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the mitigating measures and issue recommendations when the measures implemented are deemed inappropriate or ineffective to address the systemic risk at stake.

Amendment  64

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 59

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(59) Very large online platforms should, where appropriate, conduct their risk assessments and design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, representatives of groups potentially impacted by their services, independent experts and civil society organisations.	(59) Very large online platforms should, where appropriate, conduct their risk assessments and design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, independent experts and civil society organisations.

Amendment  65

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 60

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.	(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through external independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation. In particular, audits should assess the clarity, coherence and predictable enforcement of terms of service, the completeness, methodology and consistency of the transparency reporting obligations, the accuracy, predictability and clarity of the provider's follow-up for recipients of the service and notice providers regarding notices of illegal content and terms of service violations, the accuracy of classification of removed information, the internal complaint handling mechanism, the interaction with trusted flaggers and assessment of their accuracy, the diligence with regard to the verification of the traceability of traders, the adequateness and correctness of the risk assessment, the adequateness and effectiveness of the risk mitigation measures taken and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaken pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the vetted auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Vetted auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets,that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. This guarantee should not be a means to circumvent the applicability of audit obligations in this Regulation applicable to very large online platforms. Auditors should be legally and financially independent and should not have conflict of interest involving the very large online platform concerned and other very large online platforms, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. Additionally, vetted auditors and their employees should not have provided any service to the very large online platform audited for 12 months before the audit. They should also commit not to work for the very large online platform audited or a professional organisation or business association of which the platform is a member for 12 months after their position in the auditing organisation has ended. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.

Amendment  66

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 61

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken.	(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. Where applicable, the report should include a description of specific elements that could not be audited, and an explanation of why these could not be audited. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken. Where the audit opinion could not reach a conclusion for specific elements that fall within the scope of the audit, a statement of reasons for the failure to reach such a conclusion should be included in the audit opinion.

Amendment  67

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 62

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient.	(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. Often, they facilitate the search for relevant content for recipients of the service and contribute to an improved user experience. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should let the recipients decide whether they want to be subject to recommender systems based on profiling and ensure that there is an option which is not based on profiling. In addition, online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, on the use of recommender systems, and that recipients can influence the information presented to them through making active choices. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible and user-friendly manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them, the reason why, and how to modify the parameters used to curate the content presented for the recipients. Very large online platforms should implement appropriate technical and organisational measures for ensuring that recommender systems are designed in a consumer friendly manner and do not influence end users’ behaviour through dark patterns.

Amendment  68

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 63

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.	(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements, including the name of the product, service or brand and the object of the advertisement, and related data on the advertiser, and, if different, the natural or legal person who paid for the advertisement, and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned. In addition, very large online platforms should label any known deep fake videos, audio or other files.

Amendment  69

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 64

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.	(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data and algorithms. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by vetted researchers, vetted not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations, on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers, not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations,. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including personal data, trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service. Vetted researchers, not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks.

Amendment  70

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 66

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(66) To facilitate the effective and consistent application of the obligations in this Regulation that may require implementation through technological means, it is important to promote voluntary industry standards covering certain technical procedures, where the industry can help develop standardised means to comply with this Regulation, such as allowing the submission of notices, including through application programming interfaces, or about the interoperability of advertisement repositories. Such standards could in particular be useful for relatively small providers of intermediary services. The standards could distinguish between different types of illegal content or different types of intermediary services, as appropriate.	(66) To facilitate the effective and consistent application of the obligations in this Regulation that may require implementation through technological means, it is important to promote voluntary standards covering certain technical procedures, where the industry can help develop standardised means to comply with this Regulation, such as allowing the submission of notices, including through application programming interfaces, about the interoperability of advertisement repositories, or about terms and conditions. Such standards could in particular be useful for relatively small providers of intermediary services. The standards could distinguish between different types of illegal content or different types of intermediary services, as appropriate. In the absence of relevant standards agreed within [24 months after the entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission should be able to establish technical specifications by implementing acts until a voluntary standard is agreed.

Amendment  71

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 67

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.	(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct as well as the compliance with the provisions of these codes to contribute to the application of this Regulation. The Commission and the Board should aim that the codes of conduct clearly define the nature of the public interest objectives being addressed, that they contain mechanisms for independent evaluation of the achievement of these objectives and that the role of competent authorities is clearly defined. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.

Amendment  72

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 68

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.	(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation, or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of intentionally inaccurate or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure.

Amendment  73

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 69

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, the Commission will issue guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan.	(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. The Commission should also encourage the development of codes of conduct to facilitate compliance with obligations in areas, such as protection of minors or short-term rental. Other areas for consideration could be to promote diversity of information through support of high quality journalism and to foster credibility of information, whilst respecting confidentiality of journalistic sources. Moreover, it is important to ensure consistency with already existing enforcement mechanisms, such as those in the area of electronic communications or media and with independent regulatory structures in these fields as defined by Union and national law.

Amendment  74

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 70

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.	(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives. The effectiveness of the codes of conduct should be regularly assessed. Unlike legislation, codes of conduct are not subject to democratic scrutiny and their compliance with fundamental rights is not subject to judicial review. In order to enhance accountability, participation and transparency, procedural safeguards for drawing up codes of conduct are needed. Before initiating or facilitating the drawing-up or the revision of codes of conduct, the Commission may invite where appropriate, the Fundamental Rights Agency or the European Data Protection Supervisor to express their opinion.

Amendment  75

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 71

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(71) In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross-border response in the online environment. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable information. In light of the important role of very large online platforms in disseminating information in our societies and across borders, such platforms should be encouraged in drawing up and applying specific crisis protocols. Such crisis protocols should be activated only for a limited period of time and the measures adopted should also be limited to what is strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstance. Those measures should be consistent with this Regulation, and should not amount to a general obligation for the participating very large online platforms to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal content.	(71) In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of voluntary crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross-border response in the online environment. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable information. In light of the important role of very large online platforms in disseminating information in our societies and across borders, such platforms should be encouraged in drawing up and applying specific crisis protocols. Such crisis protocols should be activated only for a limited period of time and the measures adopted should also be limited to what is strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstance. Those measures should be consistent with this Regulation, and should not amount to a general obligation for the participating very large online platforms to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal content.

Amendment  76

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 72

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(72) The task of ensuring adequate oversight and enforcement of the obligations laid down in this Regulation should in principle be attributed to the Member States. To this end, they should appoint at least one authority with the task to apply and enforce this Regulation. Member States should however be able to entrust more than one competent authority, with specific supervisory or enforcement tasks and competences concerning the application of this Regulation, for example for specific sectors, such as electronic communications’ regulators, media regulators or consumer protection authorities, reflecting their domestic constitutional, organisational and administrative structure.	(72) The task of ensuring adequate oversight and enforcement of the obligations laid down in this Regulation should in principle be attributed to the Member States. To this end, they should designate at least one authority with the task to apply and enforce this Regulation. Member States should however be able to entrust more than one competent authority, with specific supervisory or enforcement tasks and competences concerning the application of this Regulation, for example for specific sectors, such as electronic communications’ regulators, media regulators or consumer protection authorities, reflecting their domestic constitutional, organisational and administrative structure.

Amendment  77

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 73

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(73) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake and the horizontal range of obligations introduced by this Regulation, the authority appointed with the task of supervising the application and, where necessary, enforcing this Regulation should be identified as a Digital Services Coordinator in each Member State. Where more than one competent authority is appointed to apply and enforce this Regulation, only one authority in that Member State should be identified as a Digital Services Coordinator. The Digital Services Coordinator should act as the single contact point with regard to all matters related to the application of this Regulation for the Commission, the Board, the Digital Services Coordinators of other Member States, as well as for other competent authorities of the Member State in question. In particular, where several competent authorities are entrusted with tasks under this Regulation in a given Member State, the Digital Services Coordinator should coordinate and cooperate with those authorities in accordance with the national law setting their respective tasks, and should ensure effective involvement of all relevant authorities in the supervision and enforcement at Union level.	(73) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake and the horizontal range of obligations introduced by this Regulation, the authority appointed with the task of supervising the application and, where necessary, enforcing this Regulation should be identified as a Digital Services Coordinator in each Member State. Where more than one competent authority is appointed to apply and enforce this Regulation, only one authority in that Member State should be designated as a Digital Services Coordinator. The Digital Services Coordinator should act as the single contact point with regard to all matters related to the application of this Regulation for the Commission, the Board, the Digital Services Coordinators of other Member States, as well as for other competent authorities of the Member State in question. In particular, where several competent authorities are entrusted with tasks under this Regulation in a given Member State, the Digital Services Coordinator should coordinate and cooperate with those authorities in accordance with the national law setting their respective tasks, and should ensure effective involvement of all relevant authorities in the supervision and enforcement at Union level.

Amendment  78

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 74

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(74) The Digital Services Coordinator, as well as other competent authorities designated under this Regulation, play a crucial role in ensuring the effectiveness of the rights and obligations laid down in this Regulation and the achievement of its objectives. Accordingly, it is necessary to ensure that those authorities act in complete independence from private and public bodies, without the obligation or possibility to seek or receive instructions, including from the government, and without prejudice to the specific duties to cooperate with other competent authorities, the Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the Commission. On the other hand, the independence of these authorities should not mean that they cannot be subject, in accordance with national constitutions and without endangering the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, to national control or monitoring mechanisms regarding their financial expenditure or to judicial review, or that they should not have the possibility to consult other national authorities, including law enforcement authorities or crisis management authorities, where appropriate.	(74) The Digital Services Coordinator, as well as other competent authorities designated under this Regulation, play a crucial role in ensuring the effectiveness of the rights and obligations laid down in this Regulation and the achievement of its objectives. Accordingly, it is necessary to ensure that those authorities have the necessary financial and human resources to carry out their tasks under this Regulation. It is also necessary to ensure that those authorities act in complete independence from private and public bodies, without the obligation or possibility to seek or receive instructions, including from the government, and without prejudice to the specific duties to cooperate with other competent authorities, the Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the Commission. On the other hand, the independence of these authorities should not mean that they cannot be subject, in accordance with national constitutions and without endangering the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, to national control or monitoring mechanisms regarding their financial expenditure or to judicial review, or that they should not have the possibility to consult other national authorities, including law enforcement authorities or crisis management authorities, where appropriate.

Amendment  79

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 75

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(75) Member States can designate an existing national authority with the function of the Digital Services Coordinator, or with specific tasks to apply and enforce this Regulation, provided that any such appointed authority complies with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, such as in relation to its independence. Moreover, Member States are in principle not precluded from merging functions within an existing authority, in accordance with Union law. The measures to that effect may include, inter alia, the preclusion to dismiss the President or a board member of a collegiate body of an existing authority before the expiry of their terms of office, on the sole ground that an institutional reform has taken place involving the merger of different functions within one authority, in the absence of any rules guaranteeing that such dismissals do not jeopardise the independence and impartiality of such members.	(75) Member States can designate an existing national authority with the function of the Digital Services Coordinator, or with specific tasks to supervise the application and enforce this Regulation, provided that any such appointed authority complies with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, such as in relation to its independence. Moreover, Member States are in principle not precluded from merging functions within an existing authority, in accordance with Union law. The measures to that effect may include, inter alia, the preclusion to dismiss the President or a board member of a collegiate body of an existing authority before the expiry of their terms of office, on the sole ground that an institutional reform has taken place involving the merger of different functions within one authority, in the absence of any rules guaranteeing that such dismissals do not jeopardise the independence and impartiality of such members.

Amendment  80

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 76

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.	(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in this Regulation by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.

Amendment  81

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 77

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(77) Member States should provide the Digital Services Coordinator, and any other competent authority designated under this Regulation, with sufficient powers and means to ensure effective investigation and enforcement. Digital Services Coordinators should in particular be able to search for and obtain information which is located in its territory, including in the context of joint investigations, with due regard to the fact that oversight and enforcement measures concerning a provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State should be adopted by the Digital Services Coordinator of that other Member State, where relevant in accordance with the procedures relating to cross-border cooperation.	(77) Member States should provide the Digital Services Coordinator, and any other competent authority designated under this Regulation, with sufficient powers and means to ensure effective investigation and enforcement. Digital Services Coordinators should in particular be able to adopt proportionate interim measures in case of risk of serious harm, as well as to search for and obtain information which is located in its territory, including in the context of joint investigations, with due regard to the fact that oversight and enforcement measures concerning a provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State should be adopted by the Digital Services Coordinator of that other Member State, where relevant in accordance with the procedures relating to cross-border cooperation.

Amendment  82

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 78

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation.	(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation. In order to ensure consistent and uniform application of this Regulation, the Commission should adopt guidance on the rules and procedures related to the powers of Digital Services Coordinators.

Amendment  83

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 79

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(79) In the course of the exercise of those powers, the competent authorities should comply with the applicable national rules regarding procedures and matters such as the need for a prior judicial authorisation to enter certain premises and legal professional privilege. Those provisions should in particular ensure respect for the fundamental rights to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, including the rights of defence, and, the right to respect for private life. In this regard, the guarantees provided for in relation to the proceedings of the Commission pursuant to this Regulation could serve as an appropriate point of reference. A prior, fair and impartial procedure should be guaranteed before taking any final decision, including the right to be heard of the persons concerned, and the right to have access to the file, while respecting confidentiality and professional and business secrecy, as well as the obligation to give meaningful reasons for the decisions. This should not preclude the taking of measures, however, in duly substantiated cases of urgency and subject to appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements. The exercise of powers should also be proportionate to, inter alia the nature and the overall actual or potential harm caused by the infringement or suspected infringement. The competent authorities should in principle take all relevant facts and circumstances of the case into account, including information gathered by competent authorities in other Member States.	(79) In the course of the exercise of those powers, the competent authorities should comply with the applicable national rules regarding procedures and matters such as the need for a prior judicial authorisation to enter certain premises and legal professional privilege. Those provisions should in particular ensure respect for the fundamental rights to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, including the rights of defence, and, the right to respect for private life. In this regard, the guarantees provided for in relation to the proceedings of the Commission pursuant to this Regulation could serve as an appropriate point of reference. A prior, fair and impartial procedure should be guaranteed before taking any final decision, including the right to be heard of the persons concerned, and the right to have access to the file, while respecting confidentiality and professional and business secrecy, as well as the obligation to give meaningful reasons for the decisions. This should not preclude the taking of measures, however, in duly substantiated cases of urgency and subject to appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements. The exercise of powers should also be proportionate to, inter alia the nature and the overall actual or potential harm caused by the infringement or suspected infringement. The competent authorities should take all relevant facts and circumstances of the case into account, including information gathered by competent authorities in other Member States.

Amendment  84

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 80

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(80) Member States should ensure that violations of the obligations laid down in this Regulation can be sanctioned in a manner that is effective, proportionate and dissuasive, taking into account the nature, gravity, recurrence and duration of the violation, in view of the public interest pursued, the scope and kind of activities carried out, as well as the economic capacity of the infringer. In particular, penalties should take into account whether the provider of intermediary services concerned systematically or recurrently fails to comply with its obligations stemming from this Regulation, as well as, where relevant, whether the provider is active in several Member States.	(80) Member States should ensure that violations of the obligations laid down in this Regulation can be sanctioned in a manner that is effective, proportionate and dissuasive, taking into account the nature, gravity, recurrence and duration of the violation, in view of the public interest pursued, the scope and kind of activities carried out, as well as the economic capacity of the infringer. In particular, penalties should take into account whether the provider of intermediary services concerned systematically or recurrently fails to comply with its obligations stemming from this Regulation, as well as, where relevant, the number of recipients affected, the intentional or negligent character of the infringement and whether the provider is active in several Member States. The Commission should issue guidance to Member States concerning the criteria and conditions to impose proportionate penalties.

Amendment  85

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 81

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(81) In order to ensure effective enforcement of this Regulation, individuals or representative organisations should be able to lodge any complaint related to compliance with this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator in the territory where they received the service, without prejudice to this Regulation’s rules on jurisdiction. Complaints should provide a faithful overview of concerns related to a particular intermediary service provider’s compliance and could also inform the Digital Services Coordinator of any more cross-cutting issues. The Digital Services Coordinator should involve other national competent authorities as well as the Digital Services Coordinator of another Member State, and in particular the one of the Member State where the provider of intermediary services concerned is established, if the issue requires cross-border cooperation.	(81) In order to ensure effective enforcement of the obligations, laid down in this Regulation, individuals or representative organisations should be able to lodge any complaint related to compliance with this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator in the territory where they received the service, without prejudice to this Regulation’s rules on jurisdiction. Complaints should provide a faithful overview of concerns related to a particular intermediary service provider’s compliance and could also inform the Digital Services Coordinator of any more cross-cutting issues. The Digital Services Coordinator should involve other national competent authorities as well as the Digital Services Coordinator of another Member State, and in particular the one of the Member State where the provider of intermediary services concerned is established, if the issue requires cross-border cooperation. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment should assess the complaint in a timely manner and inform the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established, on how the complaint has been handled.

Amendment  86

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 82

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(82) Member States should ensure that Digital Services Coordinators can take measures that are effective in addressing and proportionate to certain particularly serious and persistent infringements. Especially where those measures can affect the rights and interests of third parties, as may be the case in particular where the access to online interfaces is restricted, it is appropriate to require that the measures be ordered by a competent judicial authority at the Digital Service Coordinators’ request and are subject to additional safeguards. In particular, third parties potentially affected should be afforded the opportunity to be heard and such orders should only be issued when powers to take such measures as provided by other acts of Union law or by national law, for instance to protect collective interests of consumers, to ensure the prompt removal of web pages containing or disseminating child pornography, or to disable access to services are being used by a third party to infringe an intellectual property right, are not reasonably available.	(82) Member States should ensure that Digital Services Coordinators can take measures that are effective in addressing and proportionate to certain particularly serious and persistent infringements of this Regulation. Especially where those measures can affect the rights and interests of third parties, as may be the case in particular where the access to online interfaces is restricted, it is appropriate to require that the measures be ordered by a competent judicial authority at the Digital Service Coordinators’ request and are subject to additional safeguards. In particular, third parties potentially affected should be afforded the opportunity to be heard and such orders should only be issued when powers to take such measures as provided by other acts of Union law or by national law, for instance to protect collective interests of consumers, to ensure the prompt removal of web pages containing or disseminating child pornography, or to disable access to services are being used by a third party to infringe an intellectual property right, are not reasonably available.

Amendment  87

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 83 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(83a) Without prejudice to the provisions on the exemption from liability, provided for in this Regulation as regards the information transmitted or stored at the request of a recipient of the service, providers of intermediary services should be liable for the infringement of their obligations laid down in this Regulation. Recipients of the service and organisations representing them should be entitled to have access to proportionate and effective remedies. They should in particular have the right to seek, in accordance with national or Union law, compensation from those providers of intermediary services against any direct damage or loss suffered due to an infringement by providers of intermediary services of obligations established under this Regulation.

Amendment  88

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 84

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(84) The Digital Services Coordinator should regularly publish a report on the activities carried out under this Regulation. Given that the Digital Services Coordinator is also made aware of orders to take action against illegal content or to provide information regulated by this Regulation through the common information sharing system, the Digital Services Coordinator should include in its annual report the number and categories of these orders addressed to providers of intermediary services issued by judicial and administrative authorities in its Member State.	(84) The Digital Services Coordinator should regularly publish a report in a standardised and machine-readable format on the activities carried out under this Regulation. Given that the Digital Services Coordinator is also made aware of orders to take action against illegal content or to provide information regulated by this Regulation through the common information sharing system, based on the Internal Market Information system, the Digital Services Coordinator should include in its annual report the number and categories of these orders addressed to providers of intermediary services issued by judicial and administrative authorities in its Member State.

Amendment  89

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 86

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(86) In order to facilitate cross-border supervision and investigations involving several Member States, the Digital Services Coordinators should be able to participate, on a permanent or temporary basis, in joint oversight and investigation activities concerning matters covered by this Regulation. Those activities may include other competent authorities and may cover a variety of issues, ranging from coordinated data gathering exercises to requests for information or inspections of premises, within the limits and scope of powers available to each participating authority. The Board may be requested to provide advice in relation to those activities, for example by proposing roadmaps and timelines for activities or proposing ad-hoc task-forces with participation of the authorities involved.	(86) In order to facilitate cross-border supervision and investigations involving several Member States, the Digital Services Coordinators should be able to participate, on a permanent or temporary basis, in joint oversight and investigation activities concerning matters covered by this Regulation on the basis of an agreement between the Member States concerned, and in the absence of agreement, under the authority of the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment. Those activities may include other competent authorities and may cover a variety of issues, ranging from coordinated data gathering exercises to requests for information or inspections of premises, within the limits and scope of powers available to each participating authority. The Board may be requested to provide advice in relation to those activities, for example by proposing roadmaps and timelines for activities or proposing ad-hoc task-forces with participation of the authorities involved.

Amendment  90

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 88

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(88) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory group at Union level, which should support the Commission and help coordinate the actions of Digital Services Coordinators. That European Board for Digital Services should consist of the Digital Services Coordinators, without prejudice to the possibility for Digital Services Coordinators to invite in its meetings or appoint ad hoc delegates from other competent authorities entrusted with specific tasks under this Regulation, where that is required pursuant to their national allocation of tasks and competences. In case of multiple participants from one Member State, the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State.	(88) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory group at Union level, which should support the Commission and help coordinate the actions of Digital Services Coordinators. That European Board for Digital Services should consist of the Digital Services Coordinators, without prejudice to the possibility for Digital Services Coordinators to invite in its meetings or appoint ad hoc delegates from other competent authorities entrusted with specific tasks under this Regulation, where that is required pursuant to their national allocation of tasks and competences. In case of multiple participants from one Member State, the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. The rules of procedure of the Board should ensure respecting the confidentiality of the information.

Amendment  91

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 90

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(90) For that purpose, the Board should be able to adopt opinions, requests and recommendations addressed to Digital Services Coordinators or other competent national authorities. While not legally binding, the decision to deviate therefrom should be properly explained and could be taken into account by the Commission in assessing the compliance of the Member State concerned with this Regulation.	(90) For that purpose, the Board should be able to adopt opinions, requests and recommendations addressed to Digital Services Coordinators or other competent national authorities. While not legally binding, the decision to deviate therefrom should be properly explained and could be taken into account by the Commission in assessing the compliance of the Member State concerned with this Regulation. The Board should draw up an annual report regarding its activities.

Amendment  92

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 91

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non-discrimination, data protection, electronic communications, audiovisual services, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.	(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non-discrimination, gender equality and non-discrimination, eradication of all forms of violence against women and girls and other forms of gender-based violence, data protection, respect for intellectual property, competition, electronic communications, audiovisual services, market surveillance, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.

Amendment  93

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 96

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(96) Where the infringement of the provision that solely applies to very large online platforms is not effectively addressed by that platform pursuant to the action plan, only the Commission may, on its own initiative or upon advice of the Board, decide to further investigate the infringement concerned and the measures that the platform has subsequently taken, to the exclusion of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. After having conducted the necessary investigations, the Commission should be able to issue decisions finding an infringement and imposing sanctions in respect of very large online platforms where that is justified. It should also have such a possibility to intervene in cross-border situations where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment did not take any measures despite the Commission’s request, or in situations where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment itself requested for the Commission to intervene, in respect of an infringement of any other provision of this Regulation committed by a very large online platform.	(96) Where the infringement of the provision that solely applies to very large online platforms is not effectively addressed by that platform pursuant to the action plan, only the Commission should, on its own initiative or upon advice of the Board, initiate further investigation on the infringement concerned and the measures that the platform has subsequently taken, to the exclusion of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. After having conducted the necessary investigations, the Commission should be able to issue decisions finding an infringement and imposing sanctions in respect of very large online platforms where that is justified. It should also intervene in cross-border situations where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment did not take any measures despite the Commission’s request, or in situations where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment itself requested for the Commission to intervene, in respect of an infringement of any other provision of this Regulation committed by a very large online platform. The Commission should initiate proceedings in view of the possible adoption of decisions in respect of the relevant conduct by the very large online platform for example where that platform is suspected of having infringed this Regulation including where the platform has been found to not implement the operational recommendations from the independent audit that has been endorsed by Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment did not take any investigatory or enforcement measures.

Amendment  94

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 97

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(97) The Commission should remain free to decide whether or not it wishes to intervene in any of the situations where it is empowered to do so under this Regulation. Once the Commission initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necessary.	(97) Once the Commission initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necessary.

Amendment  95

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 97 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(97a) The Commission should ensure that it is independent and impartial in its decision making in regards to both Digital Services Coordinators and providers of services under this Regulation.

Amendment  96

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 99

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(99) In particular, the Commission should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers	(99) In particular, the Commission, should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or that individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers.

Amendment  97

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 100

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(100) Compliance with the relevant obligations imposed under this Regulation should be enforceable by means of fines and periodic penalty payments. To that end, appropriate levels of fines and periodic penalty payments should also be laid down for non-compliance with the obligations and breach of the procedural rules, subject to appropriate limitation periods.	(100) Compliance with the relevant obligations imposed under this Regulation should be enforceable by means of fines and periodic penalty payments. To that end, appropriate levels of fines and periodic penalty payments should also be laid down for non-compliance with the obligations and breach of the procedural rules, subject to appropriate limitation periods. The Commission should in particular ensure that the penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, taking into account the nature, gravity, recurrence and duration of the violation, in view of the public interest pursued, the scope and nature of activities carried out, the number of recipients affected, the intentional or negligent character of the infringement as well as the economic capacity of the infringer.

Amendment  98

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 102

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(102) In the interest of effectiveness and efficiency, in addition to the general evaluation of the Regulation, to be performed within five years of entry into force, after the initial start-up phase and on the basis of the first three years of application of this Regulation, the Commission should also perform an evaluation of the activities of the Board and on its structure.	(102) The Commission should carry out a general evaluation of this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. This report should address in particular the definition of very large online platforms and the number of average monthly active recipients of the service. This report should also address the implementation of codes of conduct, as well as the obligation to designate a representative, established in the Union and assess the effect of similar obligations imposed by third countries on European service providers operating abroad. In particular, the Commissions should assess any impact of the costs to European service providers of any similar requirements, including to designate a legal representative, introduced by third countries and any new barriers to non-Union market access after the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission should also assess the impact on the ability of European businesses and consumers to access and buy products and services from outside the Union. In the interest of effectiveness and efficiency, in addition to the general evaluation of the Regulation, to be performed within three years of entry into force, after the initial start-up phase and on the basis of the first three years of application of this Regulation, the Commission should also perform an evaluation of the activities of the Board and on its structure.

Amendment  99

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Subject matter and scope	Subject matter

Amendment  100

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) rules on the implementation and enforcement of this Regulation, including as regards the cooperation of and coordination between the competent authorities.	(c) rules on the implementation and enforcement of the requirements set out in this Regulation, including as regards the cooperation of and coordination between the competent authorities.

Amendment  101

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.	(b) set out harmonised rules for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected

Amendment  102

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) promote a high level of consumer protection and contribute to increased consumer choice while facilitating innovation, support digital transition and encourage economic growth within the internal market.

Amendment  103

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. This Regulation shall apply to intermediary services provided to recipients of the service that have their place of establishment or residence in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment of the providers of those services.	deleted

Amendment  104

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. This Regulation shall not apply to any service that is not an intermediary service or to any requirements imposed in respect of such a service, irrespective of whether the service is provided through the use of an intermediary service.	deleted

Amendment  105

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by the following:	deleted
(a) Directive 2000/31/EC;
(b) Directive 2010/13/EC;
(c) Union law on copyright and related rights;
(d) Regulation (EU) …/…. on preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online [TCO once adopted];
(e) Regulation (EU) …./….on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters and Directive (EU) …./….laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings [e-evidence once adopted]
(f) Regulation (EU) 2019/1148;
(g) Regulation (EU) 2019/1150;
(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394;
(i) Union law on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC.

Amendment  106

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 1a
	Scope
	1. This Regulation shall apply to intermediary services provided to recipients of the service that have their place of establishment or residence in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment of the providers of those services.
	2. This Regulation shall not apply to any service that is not an intermediary service or to any requirements imposed in respect of such a service, irrespective of whether the service is provided through the use of an intermediary service.
	3. This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by the following:
	(a) Directive 2000/31/EC;
	(b) Directive 2010/13/EC;
	(c) Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market;
	(d) Regulation (EU) …/….2021/784 on preventing addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online;
	(e) Regulation (EU) …./….on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters and Directive (EU) …./….laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings [e-evidence once adopted]
	(f) Regulation (EU) 2019/1148;
	(g) Regulation (EU) 2019/1150;
	(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Regulation(EU) 2019/1020 and Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety;
	(i) Union law on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC.
	(j) Directive (EU) 2019/882;
	(k) Directive (EU) 2018/1972;
	(l) Directive 2013/11/EU.
	4. By [12 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] the Commission shall publish guidelines with regard to the relationship between this Regulation and the legal acts referred to in Article 1a (3).

Amendment  107

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) ‘information society services’ means services within the meaning of Article 1(1)(b) of Directive (EU) 2015/1535;	(a) ‘information society services’ means services as defined in Article 1(1)(b) of Directive (EU) 2015/1535;

Amendment  108

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) ‘recipient of the service’ means any natural or legal person who uses the relevant intermediary service;	(b) ‘recipient of the service’ means any natural or legal person who uses the relevant intermediary service in order to seek information or to make it accessible;

Amendment  109

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) ‘consumer’ means any natural person who is acting for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business or profession;	(c) ‘consumer’ means any natural person who is acting for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business, craft, or profession;

Amendment  110

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union; such a substantial connection is deemed to exist where the provider has an establishment in the Union; in the absence of such an establishment, the assessment of a substantial connection is based on specific factual criteria, such as:	(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of a provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union;

Amendment  111

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a significant number of users in one or more Member States; or	deleted

Amendment  112

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States.	deleted

Amendment  113

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) ‘substantial connection to the Union’ means the connection of a provider with one or more Member States resulting either from its establishment in the Union, or in the absence of such an establishment, from the fact that the provider directs its activities towards one or more Member States;

Amendment  114

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) ‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession;	(e) ‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes directly relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession;

Amendment  115

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a ‘mere conduit’ service that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network;	— a ‘mere conduit’ service that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network including technical auxiliary functional services;

Amendment  116

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a ‘caching’ service that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, involving the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients upon their request;	— a ‘caching’ service that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, involving the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients upon their request;

Amendment  117

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information, which, in itself or by its reference to an activity, including the sale of products or provision of services is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;	(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information or activity, including the sale of products or provision of services which is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;

Amendment  118

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 another service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that other service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.	(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 or a purely ancillary feature of another service or functionality of the principal 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  119

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(k) ‘online interface’ means any software, including a website or a part thereof, and applications, including mobile applications;	(k) ‘online interface’ means any software, including a website or a part thereof, and applications, including mobile applications which enables the recipients of the service to access and interact with the relevant intermediary service;

Amendment  120

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ka) ‘trusted flagger’ means an entity that has been awarded such status by a Digital Services Coordinator;

Amendment  121

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed to promote the message of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether to achieve commercial or non-commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface against remuneration specifically for promoting that information;	(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed and disseminated to promote the message of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether to achieve commercial or non-commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface against remuneration specifically in exchange for promoting that message;

Amendment  122

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(na) 'remuneration' means economic compensation consisting of direct or indirect payment for the service provided, including where the intermediary service provider is not directly compensated by the recipient of the service or where the recipient of the service provides data to the service provider, except where such data is collected for the sole purpose of meeting legal requirements;

Amendment  123

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system used by an online platform to suggest in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;	(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system used by an online platform to suggest, prioritise or curate in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;

Amendment  124

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities undertaken by providers of intermediary services aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;	(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities, either automated or not automated, undertaken by providers of intermediary services aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, delisting, demonetisation or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;

Amendment  125

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services.	(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications, by the service provider irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services.

Amendment  126

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(qa) ‘persons with disabilities’ means persons with disabilities within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882.

Amendment  127

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	3. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a judicial or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  128

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, the service provider shall not be liable for the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients of the service upon their request, on condition that:	1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, the service provider shall not be liable for the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient or secure the information's onward transmission to other recipients of the service upon their request, on condition that the provider:

Amendment  129

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the provider does not modify the information;	(a) does not modify the information;

Amendment  130

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the provider complies with conditions on access to the information;	(b) complies with conditions on access to the information;

Amendment  131

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the provider complies with rules regarding the updating of the information, specified in a manner widely recognised and used by industry;	(c) complies with rules regarding the updating of the information, specified in a manner widely recognised and used by industry;

Amendment  132

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the provider does not interfere with the lawful use of technology, widely recognised and used by industry, to obtain data on the use of the information; and	(d) does not interfere with the lawful use of technology, widely recognised and used by industry, to obtain data on the use of the information; and

Amendment  133

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the provider acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the information it has stored upon obtaining actual knowledge of the fact that the information at the initial source of the transmission has been removed from the network, or access to it has been disabled, or that a court or an administrative authority has ordered such removal or disablement.	(e) acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the information it has stored upon obtaining actual knowledge of the fact that the information at the initial source of the transmission has been removed from the network, or access to it has been disabled, or that a court or an administrative authority has ordered such removal or disablement.

Amendment  134

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	2. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a judicial or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  135

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe 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.	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 presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead a consumer to believe 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.

Amendment  136

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	4. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a judicial or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  137

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation.	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 take measures aimed at detecting, identifying and removing, or disabling of access to, illegal content or take the necessary measures to comply with the requirements of national and Union law, including the Charter and the requirements set out in this Regulation.

Amendment  138

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that voluntary own-initiative investigations carried out and measures taken pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be effective and specific. Such own initiative investigations and measures shall be accompanied by appropriate safeguards, such as human oversight, documentation, or any additional measure to ensure and demonstrate that those investigations and measures are accurate, non-discriminatory, proportionate, transparent and do not lead to over-removal of content. Providers of intermediary services shall make best efforts to ensure that where automated means are used, the technology is sufficiently reliable to limit to the maximum extent possible the rate of errors where information is wrongly considered as illegal content.

Amendment  139

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers.	1. No general obligation to monitor, neither de jure, nor de facto, through automated or non-automated means, the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity or for monitoring the behaviour of natural persons shall be imposed on those providers.

Amendment  140

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Providers of intermediary services shall not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation or for monitoring the behaviour of natural persons.

Amendment  141

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. Member States shall not prevent providers of intermediary services from offering end-to-end encrypted services.

Amendment  142

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. Member States shall not impose a general obligation on providers of intermediary services to limit the anonymous use of their services. Member States shall not oblige providers of intermediary services to generally and indiscriminately retain personal data of the recipients of their services. Any targeted retention of a specific recipient’s data shall be ordered by a judicial authority in accordance with Union or national law.

Amendment  143

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order to act against a specific item of illegal content, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities, on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt via a secure communications channel of an order to act against one or more specific items of illegal content, received from and issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the actions taken and the moment when the actions were taken.

Amendment  144

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— a reference to the legal basis for the order;

Amendment  145

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a statement of reasons explaining why the information is illegal content, by reference to the specific provision of Union or national law infringed;	— a sufficiently detailed statement of reasons explaining why the information is illegal content, by reference to the specific provision of Union or national law in conformity with Union law;

Amendment  146

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— identification of the issuing authority including the date, timestamp and electronic signature of the authority, that allows the recipient to authenticate the order and contact details of a person of contact within the said authority;

Amendment  147

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— one or more exact uniform resource locators and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content concerned;	— a clear indication of the exact electronic location of that information, such as the exact URL or URLs where appropriate or when the exact electronic location is not precisely identifiable; one or more exact uniform resource locators and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content concerned;

Amendment  148

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— information about redress available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content;	— easily understandable information about redress mechanisms available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content, including the deadlines for appeal;

Amendment  149

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— where necessary and proportionate, the decision not to disclose information about the removal of or disabling of access to the content for reasons of public security, such as the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime, not exceeding six weeks from that decision;

Amendment  150

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the territorial scope of the order, on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective;	(b) the territorial scope of the order on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law in conformity with Union law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective; the territorial scope of the order shall be limited to the territory of the Member State issuing the order unless the illegality of the content derives directly from Union law or the rights at stake require a wider territorial scope, in accordance with Union and international law;

Amendment  151

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10.	(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10 or in one of the official languages of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content; in such case, the point of contact of the service provider may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;

Amendment  152

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) the order is in compliance with Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC;

Amendment  153

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cb) where more than one provider of intermediary services is responsible for hosting the specific items of illegal content, the order is issued to the most appropriate provider that has the technical and operational ability to act against those specific items.

Amendment  154

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts in accordance with Article 70, after consulting the Board, laying down a specific template and form for the orders, referred to in paragraph 1.

Amendment  155

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. Providers of intermediary services who received an order shall have a right to an effective remedy. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment may choose to intervene on behalf of the provider in any redress, appeal or other legal processes in relation to the order.
	The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment may request the authority issuing the order to withdraw or repeal the order or adjust the territorial scope of the order to what is strictly necessary. Where such a request is refused, the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment shall be entitled to seek the annulling, ceasing or adjustment of the effect of the order before the judicial authorities of the Member States issuing the order. Such proceedings shall be completed without undue delay.

Amendment  156

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. If the provider cannot comply with the removal order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the judicial or administrative authority that issued the order asking for the necessary clarification.

Amendment  157

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2d. The authority issuing the order shall transmit that order and the information received from the provider of intermediary services as to the effect given to the order to the Digital Services Coordinator from the Member State of the issuing authority.

Amendment  158

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law in conformity with Union law.	4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law and administrative procedural law in conformity with Union law, including the Charter. While acting in accordance with such laws, authorities shall not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain the objectives pursued.

Amendment  159

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Member States shall ensure that the relevant authorities may, at the request of an applicant whose rights are infringed by illegal content, issue against the relevant provider of intermediary services an injunction order in accordance with this Article to remove or disable access to that content.

Amendment  160

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt via a secure communications channel of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, received from and issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.

Amendment  161

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— the identification details of the judicial or administrative authority issuing the order and authentication of the order by that authority, including the date, time stamp and electronic signature of the authority issuing the order to provide information;

Amendment  162

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— a reference to the legal basis for the order;

Amendment  163

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— a clear indication of the exact electronic location, an account name, or a unique identifier of the recipient on whom information is sought;

Amendment  164

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a statement of reasons explaining the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;	— a sufficiently detailed statement of reasons explaining the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;

Amendment  165

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— where the information sought constitutes personal data within the meaning of Article 4, point (1), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or Article 3, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2016/680, a justification that the order is in accordance with applicable data protection law;

Amendment  166

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— information about redress available to the provider and to the recipients of the service concerned;	— information about redress available to the provider and to the recipients of the service concerned including deadlines for appeal;

Amendment  167

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	— an indication on whether the provider should inform without undue delay the recipient of the service concerned, including information about the data being sought; where information is requested in the context of criminal proceedings, the request for that information shall be in compliance with Directive (EU) 2016/680, and the information to the recipient of the service concerned about that request may be delayed as long as necessary and proportionate to avoid obstructing the relevant criminal proceedings, taking into account the rights of the suspected and accused persons and without prejudice to defence rights and effective legal remedies. Such a request shall be duly justified, specify the duration of the obligation of confidentiality and shall be subject to periodic review.

Amendment  168

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10;	(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10 or in one of the official languages of the Member State that issues the order against the item of illegal content; in such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;

Amendment  169

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts in accordance with Article 70, after consulting the Board, laying down specific template and form for the orders referred to in paragraph 1.

Amendment  170

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. The provider of intermediary services who received an order shall have a right to an effective remedy. That right shall include the right to challenge the order before the judicial authorities of the Member State of the issuing competent authority, in particular where such an order is not incompliance with Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment may choose to intervene on behalf of the provider in any redress, appeal or other legal proceedings in relation to the order.
	The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment may request the authority issuing the order to withdraw or repeal the order. Where such a request is refused, the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment shall be entitled to seek the annulling, ceasing or adjustment of the effect of the order before the judicial of the Member States of the order. Such processing shall be completed without undue delay.

Amendment  171

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. If the provider cannot comply with the order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information to enable it to be executed, it shall, without undue delay, inform the judicial or administrative authority that issued that information order and request the necessary clarifications.

Amendment  172

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2d. The authority issuing the order to provide a specific item of information shall transmit that order and the information received from the provider of intermediary services as to the effect given to the order to the Digital Services Coordinator from the Member State of the issuing authority.

Amendment  173

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law in conformity with Union law.	4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law or administrative procedural law in conformity with Union law.

Amendment  174

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 9a
	Effective remedies for recipients of the service
	1. Recipients of the service whose content was removed according to Article 8 or whose information was sought according to Article 9 shall have the right to effective remedies against such orders, including, where applicable, restauration of content where such content has been in compliance with the terms and conditions, but has been erroneously considered as illegal by the service provider, without prejudice to remedies available under Directive (EU) 2016/680 and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
	2. Such right to an effective remedy shall be exercised before a judicial authority in the issuing Member State in accordance with national law and shall include the possibility to challenge the legality of the measure, including its necessity and proportionality.
	3. Digital Services Coordinators shall develop national tools and guidance to recipients of the service as regards complaint and redress mechanisms applicable in their respective territory.

Amendment  175

 

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter III – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Due diligence obligations for a transparent and safe online environment	Due diligence obligations for a transparent, accessible and safe online environment

Amendment  176

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Points of contact	Points of contact for Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board

Amendment  177

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall establish a single point of contact allowing for direct communication, by electronic means, with Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board referred to in Article 47 for the application of this Regulation.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall designate a single point of contact enabling them to communicate directly, by electronic means, with Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board referred to in Article 47 for the application of this Regulation.

Amendment  178

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall make public the information necessary to easily identify and communicate with their single points of contact.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall communicate to the Member States' authorities, the Commission and the Board, the information necessary to easily identify and communicate with their single points of contact, including the name, the email address, the physical address and the telephone number, and shall ensure that the information is kept up to date.

Amendment  179

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Providers of intermediary services may establish the same single point of contact for this Regulation and another single point of contact as required under other Union law. When doing so, the provider shall inform the Commission of this decision.

Amendment  180

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 10a
	Points of contact for recipients of services
	1. Providers of intermediary services shall designate a single point of contact that enables recipients of services to communicate directly with them.
	2. In particular, providers of intermediary services shall enable recipients of services to communicate with them by providing rapid, direct and efficient means of communication such as telephone number, email addresses, electronic contact forms, chatbots or instant messaging as well as the physical address of the establishment of the provider of intermediary services, in a user-friendly, and easily accessible manner. Providers of intermediary services shall also enable recipients of services to choose the means of direct communication, which shall not solely rely on automated tools.
	3. Providers of intermediary services shall make all reasonable efforts to guarantee that sufficient human and financial resources are allocated to ensure that the communication, referred to in paragraph 1 is performed in a timely and efficient manner.

Amendment  181

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, in writing, a legal or natural person as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services.	1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, in writing, a legal or natural person to act as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services.

Amendment  182

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall mandate their legal representatives to be addressed in addition to or instead of the provider by the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board on all issues necessary for the receipt of, compliance with and enforcement of decisions issued in relation to this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services shall provide their legal representative with the necessary powers and resource to cooperate with the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board and comply with those decisions.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall mandate their legal representatives to be addressed in addition to or instead of the provider by the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board on all issues necessary for the receipt of,compliance with and enforcement of decisions issued in relation to this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services shall provide their legal representative with the necessary powers and sufficient resources in order to guarantee their efficient and timely cooperation with the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board and comply with any of those decisions.

Amendment  183

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Providers of intermediary services shall notify the name, address, the electronic mail address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established. They shall ensure that that information is up to date.	4. Providers of intermediary services shall notify the name, postal address, the electronic mail address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established They shall ensure that that information is kept up to date. The Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonable efforts to assess its validity.

Amendment  184

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. This Article shall be without prejudice to the fact that, in accordance with national law, a legal representative may be mandated by more than one provider of intermediary services, provided that such providers qualify as micro, small or medium sized enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC.

Amendment  185

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall use fair, non-discriminatory and transparent terms and conditions. Providers of intermediary services shall draft those terms and conditions in clear, user friendly and unambiguous language and shall make them publicly available in an easily accessible and machine-readable format in the official languages of the Member State towards which the service is directed.

Amendment  186

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. In their terms and conditions, providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions or modifications that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of content provided by the recipients of the service. Providers of intermediary services shall also include easily accessible information on the right of the recipients to terminate the use of their service. Providers of intermediary services shall also include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used by the provider of the intermediary service for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review.

Amendment  187

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. Providers of intermediary services shall notify expeditiously the recipients of the service of any significant change to the terms and conditions and provide an explanation thereof.

Amendment  188

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. Where an intermediary service is primarily directed at minors or is pre-dominantly used by them, the provider shall explain conditions for and restrictions on the use of the service in a way that minors can understand.

Amendment  189

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a diligent, objective and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a fair, transparent, coherent, diligent, timely, non-arbitrary, non-discriminatory and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.

Amendment  190

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Providers of intermediary services shall provide recipients of services with a concise, easily accessible and in machine-readable format summary of the terms and conditions, in clear, user-friendly and unambiguous language. That summary shall identify the main elements of the information requirements, including the possibility of easily opting-out from optional clauses and the remedies and redress mechanisms available.

Amendment  191

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. Providers of intermediary services may use graphical elements such as icons or images to illustrate the main elements of the information requirements.

Amendment  192

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. Very large online platforms as defined in Article 25 shall publish their terms and conditions in the official languages of all Member States in which they offer their services.

Amendment  193

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2d. Providers of intermediary services shall not require recipients of the service other than traders to make their legal identity public in order to use the service.

Amendment  194

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:	1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish in a standardised and machine-readable format and in an easily accessible manner, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:

Amendment  195

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed for taking the action specified in those orders;	(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed to inform the authority issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order;

Amendment  196

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) where applicable, the complete number of content moderators allocated for each official language per Member State, and a qualitative description of whether and how automated tools for content moderation are used in each official language;

Amendment  197

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action;	(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, the number of notices submitted by trusted flaggers, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average and median time needed for taking the action; providers of intermediary services may add additional information as to the reasons for the average time for taking the action;

Amendment  198

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the content moderation engaged in at the providers’ own initiative, including the number and type of measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of information provided by the recipients of the service and the recipients’ ability to provide information, categorised by the type of reason and basis for taking those measures;	(c) meaningful and comprehensible information about the content moderation engaged in at the providers’ own initiative, including the use of automated tools, the number and type of measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of information provided by the recipients of the service and the recipients’ ability to provide information, categorised by the type of reason and basis for taking those measures, as well as, where applicable, measures taken to provide training and assistance to members of staff who are engaged in content moderation, and to ensure that non-infringing content is not affected;

Amendment  199

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.	(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average and median time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.

Amendment  200

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The information provided shall be presented per Member State in which services are offered and in the Union as a whole.

Amendment  201

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.	2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, which do not also qualify as very large online platforms.

Amendment  202

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 13a
	Online interface design and organisation
	1. Providers of intermediary services shall not use the structure, function or manner of operation of their online interface, or any part thereof, to distort or impair recipients of services’ ability to make a free, autonomous and informed decision or choice. In particular, providers of intermediary services shall refrain from:
	(a) giving more visual prominence to any of the consent options when asking the recipient of the service for a decision;
	(b) repeatedly requesting that a recipient of the service consents to data processing, where such consent has been refused, pursuant to Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, regardless of the scope or purpose of such processing, especially by presenting a pop-up that interferes with user experience;
	(c) urging a recipient of the service to change a setting or configuration of the service after the recipient has already made a choice;
	(d) making the procedure of terminating a service significantly more cumbersome than signing up to it; or
	(e) requesting consent where the recipient of the service exercises his or her right to object by automated means using technical specifications, in line with Article 21(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
	This paragraph shall be without prejudice to Regulation(EU) 2016/679.
	2. The Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act to update the list of practices referred to in paragraph 1.
	3. Where applicable, providers of intermediary services shall adapt their design features to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security by design for minors.

Amendment  203

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:	2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of valid notices containing all of the following elements:

Amendment  204

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) where possible, evidence that substantiates the claim;

Amendment  205

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;	(b) where relevant, a clear indication of the exact electronic location of that information, for example, the exact URL or URLs, or, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content as applicable to the type of content and to the specific type of hosting service;

Amendment  206

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.	3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2, on the basis of which a diligent hosting service provider is able to establish the illegality of the content in question without conducting a legal or factual examination, shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.

Amendment  207

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. Information that has been the subject of a notice shall remain accessible while the assessment of its legality is still pending, without prejudice to the right of providers of hosting services to apply their terms and conditions. Providers of hosting services shall not be held liable for failure to remove notified information, while the assessment of legality is still pending.

Amendment  208

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Where the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, the provider of hosting services shall promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity.	4. Where the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, the provider of hosting services shall, without undue delay, send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity.

Amendment  209

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity of its decision in respect of the information to which the notice relates, providing information on the redress possibilities in respect of that decision.	5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity of its action in respect of the information to which the notice relates, providing information on the redress possibilities.

Amendment  210

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. The anonymity of individuals who submitted a notice shall be ensured towards the recipient of the service who provided the content, except in cases of alleged violations of personality rights or of intellectual property rights.

Amendment  211

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.	6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent, non-discriminatory and non-arbitrary manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4. Where the provider has no technical, operational or contractual ability to act against specific items of illegal content, it may hand over a notice to the provider that has direct control of specific items of illegal content, while informing the notifying person or entity and the relevant Digital Services Coordinator.

Amendment  212

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove or disable access to specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing or disabling access to that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.	1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove, disable access to, demote or to impose other measures with regard to specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing or disabling access to that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.
	This obligation shall not apply where the content is deceptive high-volume commercial content, or it has been requested by a judicial or law enforcement authority not to inform the recipient due to an ongoing criminal investigations until the criminal investigations is closed.

Amendment  213

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access;	(a) whether the action entails either the removal, the disabling of access, the demotion of, or imposes other measures with regard to information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the action and its duration, including, where an action was taken pursuant to Article 14, an explanation about why the action did not exceed what was strictly necessary to achieve its purpose;

Amendment  214

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the facts and circumstances relied on in taking the decision, including where relevant whether the decision was taken pursuant to a notice submitted in accordance with Article 14;	(b) the facts and circumstances relied on in taking the action, including where relevant whether the action was taken pursuant to a notice submitted in accordance with Article 14 or based on voluntary own-initiative investigations or to an order issued in accordance with Article 8 and where appropriate, the identity of the notifier;

Amendment  215

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) where applicable, information on the use made of automated means in taking the decision, including where the decision was taken in respect of content detected or identified using automated means;	(c) where applicable, information on the use made of automated means in taking the action, including where the action was taken in respect of content detected or identified using automated means;

Amendment  216

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) where the decision concerns allegedly illegal content, a reference to the legal ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be illegal content on that ground;	(d) where the action concerns allegedly illegal content, a reference to the legal ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be illegal content on that ground;

Amendment  217

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) where the decision is based on the alleged incompatibility of the information with the terms and conditions of the provider, a reference to the contractual ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be incompatible with that ground;	(e) where the action is based on the alleged incompatibility of the information with the terms and conditions of the provider, a reference to the contractual ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be incompatible with that ground;

Amendment  218

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) information on the redress possibilities available to the recipient of the service in respect of the decision, in particular through internal complaint-handling mechanisms, out-of-court dispute settlement and judicial redress.	(f) clear, user-friendly information on the redress possibilities available to the recipient of the service in respect of the action, in particular, where applicable through internal complaint-handling mechanisms, out-of-court dispute settlement and judicial redress.

Amendment  219

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Providers of hosting services shall publish the decisions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible database managed by the Commission. That information shall not contain personal data.	4. Providers of hosting services shall publish at least once a year the actions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible machine-readable database managed and published by the Commission. That information shall not contain personal data.

Amendment  220

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15 a
	Notification of suspicions of criminal offences
	1. Where a provider of hosting services becomes aware of any information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving an imminent threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or planned to take place, it shall promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide, upon their request, all the relevant information available.
	2.  Where the provider of hosting services 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 and may inform Europol.
	For the purpose of this Article, the Member State concerned shall be the Member State where the offence is suspected to have taken place, to be taking place or to be planned to take place, or the Member State where the suspected offender resides or is located, or the Member State where the victim of the suspected offence resides or is located. For the purpose of this Article, Member States shall notify to the Commission the list of its competent law enforcement or judicial authorities.
	3. Unless instructed otherwise by the informed authority, the provider of hosting services shall remove or disable the content.
	4. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified.
	5. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act setting down a template for notifications under paragraph 1.

Amendment  221

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.	1. This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC and which do not qualify as a very large online platforms as defined by Article 25 of this Regulation.
	2. Providers of intermediary services may submit an application accompanied by a justification for a waiver from the requirements of this section provided that they:
	(a) do not present significant systemic risks and have limited exposure to illegal content; and
	(b) qualify as non-for-profit or qualify as a medium enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
	3. The application shall be submitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment who shall conduct a preliminary assessment. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall transmit to the Commission the application accompanied by its assessment and where applicable, a recommendation on the Commission’s decision. The Commission shall examine such an application and, after consulting the Board, may issue a total or a partial waiver from the requirements of this Section.
	4. Where the Commission grants such a waiver, it shall monitor the use of the waiver by the provider of intermediary services to ensure that the conditions for use of the waiver are respected.
	5. Upon the request of the Board, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the provider, or on its own initiative, the Commission may review or revoke the waiver in whole or in parts.
	6. The Commission shall maintain a list of all waivers issued and their conditions and shall make the list publicly available.
	7. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 69 as to the process and procedure for the implementation of the waiver system in relation with this Article.

Amendment  222

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) decisions to remove or disable access to the information;	(a) decisions to remove, demote, disable access to or impose other measures that restrict visibility, availability or accessibility of the information;

Amendment  223

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) decisions to suspend or terminate the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;	(b) decisions to suspend or terminate, or limit the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;

Amendment  224

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) decisions to restrict the ability to monetise content provided by the recipients.

Amendment  225

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The period of at least six months as set out in paragraph 1 shall be considered to start on the day on which the recipient of the service is informed about the decision in accordance with Article 15.

Amendment  226

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints.	2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly, including for persons with disabilities and minors, non-discriminatory and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints. Online platforms shall set out the rules of procedure of their internal complaint handling system in their terms and conditions in a clear, user-friendly and easily accessible manner.

Amendment  227

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.	3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, non-discriminatory, diligent and non-arbitrary manner and within ten working days starting on the date on which the online platform received the complaint. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.

Amendment  228

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means.	5. Online platforms shall ensure that recipients of the service are given the possibility, where necessary, to contact a human interlocutor at the time of the submission of the complaint and that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means. Online platform shall ensure that decisions are taken by qualified staff.

Amendment  229

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. Recipients of the service shall have the possibility to seek swift judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member States concerned.

Amendment  230

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.	1. Recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), taken by the online platform on the grounds that the information provided by the recipients is illegal content or incompatible with its terms and conditions , shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article.

Amendment  231

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Both parties shall engage, in good faith, with the independent, external certified body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body. The possibility to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body shall be easily accessible on the online interface of the online platform in a clear and user-friendly manner.

Amendment  232

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, at the request of that body, certify the body, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:	2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, at the request of that body, certify the body for a maximum of three years, which can be renewed, where the body and persons in charge of the out-of-court dispute settlement body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:

Amendment  233

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms and recipients of the service provided by the online platforms;	(a) it is independent, including financially independent, and impartial towards online platforms, recipients of the service provided by the online platforms and towards individuals or entities that have submitted notices;

Amendment  234

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) its members are remunerated in a way that is not linked to the outcome of the procedure;

Amendment  235

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(bb) the natural persons in charge of dispute resolution commit not to work for the online platform or a professional organisation or business association of which the online platform is a member for a period of three years after their position in the body has ended, and have not worked for such an organisation for two years prior to taking up this role;

Amendment  236

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible through electronic communication technology;	(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities, through electronic communication technology and provides for the possibility to submit a complaint and the requisite supporting documents online;

Amendment  237

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure.	(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure which are clearly visible and easily and publicly accessible.

Amendment  238

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Digital Services Coordinator shall reassess on a yearly basis whether the certified out-of-court dispute settlement body continues to fulfil the conditions, referred to in paragraph 2. If this is not the case, the Digital Services Coordinator shall revoke the status from the out-of-court dispute settlement body.

Amendment  239

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. The Digital Service Coordinator shall draw up a report every two years listing the number of complaints the out of court dispute settlement body has received annually, the outcomes of the decisions delivered, any systematic or sectoral problems identified, and the average time taken to resolve the disputes. The report shall in particular:
	(a) identify best practices of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies;
	(b) report, where appropriate, on any shortcomings, supported by statistics, that hinder the functioning of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies for both domestic and cross-border disputes;
	(c) make recommendations on how to improve the effective and efficient functioning of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies, where appropriate.

Amendment  240

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall conclude dispute resolution proceedings within a reasonable period of time and no later than 90 calendar days after the date on which the certified body has received the complaint. The procedure shall be considered terminated on the date on which the certified body has made the decision of out-of-court dispute settlement procedure available.

Amendment  241

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, the online platform shall reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient has paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform, the recipient shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement.	3. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, individuals or entities mandated under Article 68 that have submitted notices, the online platform shall reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient or individuals or entities that have submitted notices have paid or are to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform, and the body does not find that the recipient acted in bad faith in the dispute, the recipient or the individuals or entities that have submitted notices shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement.

Amendment  242

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The fees charged by the body for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs thereof.	The fees charged by the body for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs thereof for online platforms. Out-of-court dispute settlement procedures shall be free of charge or available at a nominal fee for the recipient of the service.

Amendment  243

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Digital Services Coordinators shall notify to the Commission the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 2, including where applicable the specifications referred to in the second subparagraph of that paragraph. The Commission shall publish a list of those bodies, including those specifications, on a dedicated website, and keep it updated.	5. Digital Services Coordinators shall notify to the Commission the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 2, including where applicable the specifications referred to in the second subparagraph of that paragraph as well as out-of-court dispute settlement bodies whose status has been revoked. The Commission shall publish a list of those bodies, including those specifications, on a dedicated website, and keep it updated.

Amendment  244

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay.	1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers, acting within their designated area of expertise, through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and expeditiously, taking into account due process.

Amendment  245

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that trusted flaggers can issue correction notices of incorrect removal, restriction or disabling access to content, or of suspensions or terminations of accounts, and that those notices to restore information are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay.

Amendment  246

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entities, 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:	2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entity, 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  247

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner.	(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in an accurate and objective manner.

Amendment  248

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) it has a transparent funding structure, including publishing the sources and amounts of all revenue annually;

Amendment  249

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cb) it publishes, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible, detailed and standardised reports on all notices submitted in accordance with Article 14 during the relevant period. The report shall list:
	- notices categorised by the identity of the provider of hosting services;
	- the type of content notified;
	- the specific legal provisions allegedly breached by the content notified;
	- the action taken by the provider;
	- any potential conflicts of interest and sources of funding, and an explanation of the procedures in place to ensure that the trusted flagger retains its independence.
	The reports referred to in point (cb) shall be sent to the Commission which shall make them publicly available.

Amendment  250

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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.	3. Digital Services Coordinators shall award the trusted flagger status for a period of two years, upon which the status may be renewed where the trusted flagger concerned continues to meet the requirements of this Regulation. The Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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 or have been revoked in accordance with paragraph 6. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment of the platform shall engage in dialogue with platforms and stakeholders for maintaining the accuracy and efficacy of a trusted flagger system.

Amendment  251

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The Commission shall publish the information referred to in paragraph 3 in a publicly available database and keep the database updated.	4. The Commission shall publish the information referred to in paragraph 3 in a publicly available database in an easily accessible and machine-readable format and keep the database updated.

Amendment  252

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.	5. Where an online platform has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise, inaccurate 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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents. Upon receiving the information from the online platforms and if the Digital Services Coordinator considers that there are legitimate reasons to open an investigation, the status of trusted flagger shall be suspended during the period of the investigation.

Amendment  253

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. The Digital Services Coordinator 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	6. The Digital Services Coordinator 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 from third parties, including the information provided by an online platform pursuant to paragraph 5, carried out without undue delay, 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  254

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
7. The Commission, after consulting the Board, may issue guidance to assist online platforms and Digital Services Coordinators in the application of paragraphs 5 and 6.	7. The Commission, after consulting the Board, shall issue guidance to assist online platforms and Digital Services Coordinators in the application of paragraphs 2, 5 and 6.

Amendment  255

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 19 a
	Accessibility requirements for online platforms
	1. Providers of online platforms which offer services in the Union shall ensure that they design and provide services in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Section III, Section IV, Section VI, and Section VII of Annex I of Directive (EU) 2019/882.
	2. Providers of online platforms shall prepare the necessary information in accordance with Annex V of Directive (EU) 2019/882 and shall explain how the services meet the applicable accessibility requirements. The information shall be made available to the public in an accessible manner for persons with disabilities. Providers of online platforms shall keep that information for as long as the service is in operation.
	3. Providers of online platforms shall ensure that information, forms and measures provided pursuant to this Regulation are made available in a manner that they are easy to find, easy to understand, and accessible to persons with disabilities.
	4. Providers of online platforms which offer services in the Union shall ensure that procedures are in place so that the provision of services remains in conformity with the applicable accessibility requirements. Changes in the characteristics of the provision of the service, changes in applicable accessibility requirements and changes in the harmonised standards or in technical specifications by reference to which a service is declared to meet the accessibility requirements shall be adequately taken into account by the provider of intermediary services.
	5. In the case of non-conformity, providers of online platforms shall take the corrective measures necessary to bring the service into conformity with the applicable accessibility requirements.
	6. They shall cooperate with that authority, at the request of that authority, on any action taken to bring the service into compliance with those requirements.
	7. Online platforms which are in conformity with harmonised standards or parts thereof derived from Directive (EU) 2019/882 the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be presumed to be in conformity with the accessibility requirements of this Regulation in so far as those standards or parts thereof cover those requirements.
	8. Online platforms which are in conformity with the technical specifications or parts thereof adopted for the Directive (EU) 2019/882 shall be presumed to be in conformity with the accessibility requirements of this Regulation in so far as those technical specifications or parts thereof cover those requirements.

Amendment  256

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content.	1. Online platforms shall be entitled to suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide illegal content, for which the illegality can be established without conducting a legal or factual examination or for which they have received two or more orders to act regarding illegal content in the previous 12 months, unless those orders were later overturned.

Amendment  257

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequently submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded.	2. Online platforms shall be entitled to suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that repeatedly submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded.

Amendment  258

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Online platforms shall assess, on a case-by-case basis and in a timely, diligent and objective manner, whether a recipient, individual, entity or complainant engages in the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances apparent from the information available to the online platform. Those circumstances shall include at least the following:	3. When deciding on the suspension, providers of online platforms shall assess, on a case-by-case basis and in a timely, diligent and objective manner, whether a recipient, individual, entity or complainant engages in the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances apparent from the information available to the provider of the online platform. Those circumstances shall include at least the following:

Amendment  259

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the absolute numbers of items of manifestly illegal content or manifestly unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;	(a) the absolute numbers of items of illegal content or manifestly unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;

Amendment  260

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant.	(d) where identifiable the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant;

Amendment  261

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) whether a notice was submitted by an individual user or by an entity or persons with specific expertise related to the content in question or following the use of an automated content recognition system.

Amendment  262

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. Suspensions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be declared permanent where:
	(a) there are compelling reasons of law or public policy, including ongoing criminal investigations;
	(b) the items removed were components of high-volume campaigns to deceive users or manipulate platform content moderation efforts;
	(c) a trader has repeatedly offered goods and services that do not comply with Union or national law;
	(d) the items removed were related to serious crimes.

Amendment  263

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.	4. Providers of online platforms shall set out, in a clear, user-friendly, and detailed manner with due regard to their obligations under Article 12(2) their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including examples of the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.

Amendment  264

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtained the following information:	1. Online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall ensure that traders can only use their services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of their services for those purposes, they have been provided with the following information:

Amendment  265

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning of Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council51 or any relevant act of Union law;	(d) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning of Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council51 or any relevant act of Union law, including in the area of product safety;
__________________	__________________
51 Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).	51 Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).

Amendment  266

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) a self-certification by the trader committing to only offer products or services that comply with the applicable rules of Union law.	(f) a self-certification by the trader committing to only offer products or services that comply with the applicable rules of Union law and where applicable confirming that all products have been checked against available databases, such as the Union Rapid Alert System for dangerous non-food products (RAPEX);

Amendment  267

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) the type of products or services the trader intends to offer on the online platform.

Amendment  268

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The online platform shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonable efforts to assess whether the information referred to in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 is reliable through the use of any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by a Member States or the Union or through requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.	2. The online platform allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall, upon receiving that information before allowing the display of the product or service on its online interface, and until the end of the contractual relationship, make best efforts to assess whether the information referred to in points (a) to (fa) of paragraph 1 is reliable and complete. The online platform shall make best efforts to check the information provided by the trader through the use of any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by an authorised administrator or a Member States or the Union or through direct requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.
	No later than one year after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall publish the list of online databases and online interfaces mentioned in the paragraph above and keep it up-to-date. The obligations for online platforms referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall apply with regard to new and existing traders.

Amendment  269

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The online platform shall make best efforts to identify and prevent the dissemination, by traders using its service, of offers for products or services which do not comply with Union or national law through measures such as random checks on the products and services offered to consumers in addition to the obligations referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 of this Article.

Amendment  270

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Where the online platform obtains indications that any item of information referred to in paragraph 1 obtained from the trader concerned is inaccurate or incomplete, that platform shall request the trader to correct the information in so far as necessary to ensure that all information is accurate and complete, without delay or within the time period set by Union and national law.	3. Where the online platform obtains sufficient indications or has reasons to believe that any item of information referred to in paragraph 1 obtained from the trader concerned is inaccurate or incomplete, that platform shall request the trader to correct the information in so far as necessary to ensure that all information is accurate and complete, without delay or within the time period set by Union and national law.

Amendment  271

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the trader fails to correct or complete that information, the online platform shall suspend the provision of its service to the trader until the request is complied with.	Where the trader fails to correct or complete that information, the online platform shall swiftly suspend the provision of its service to the trader in relation to the offering of products or services to consumers located in the Union until the request is fully complied with.

Amendment  272

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. If an online platform rejects an application for services or suspends services to a trader, the trader shall have recourse to the mechanisms under Article 17 and Article 43 of this Regulation.

Amendment  273

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3b. Online platforms allowing consumers to conclude contracts with traders shall ensure that the identity, such as the trademark or logo, of the business user providing content, goods or services is clearly visible alongside the content, goods or services offered. For this purpose, the online platform shall establish a standardised interface for business users.

Amendment  274

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3c. Traders shall be solely liable for the accuracy of the information provided and shall inform without delay the online platform of any changes to the information provided.

Amendment  275

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The online platform shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently delete the information.	4. The online platform shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently delete the information no later than six months after the final conclusion of a distance contract.

Amendment  276

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. The online platform shall make the information referred to in points (a), (d), (e) and (f) of paragraph 1 available to the recipients of the service, in a clear, easily accessible and comprehensible manner.	6. The online platform shall make the information referred to in points (a), (d), (e), (f), and (fa) of paragraph 1 easily accessible to the recipients of the service,, in a clear, easily accessible and comprehensible manner in accordance with the accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive (EU) 2019/882.

Amendment  277

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 22a
	Obligation to inform consumers and authorities about illegal products and services
	1. Where an online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders becomes aware, irrespective of the means used to, that a product or a service offered by a trader on the interface of that platform is illegal with regard to applicable requirements in Union or national law, it shall:
	(a) remove the illegal product or service from its interface expeditiously and, where appropriate, inform the relevant authorities, such as the market surveillance authority or the custom authority of the decision taken;
	(b) where the online platform has the contact details of the recipient of the services, inform those recipients of the service that had acquired such product or service about the illegality, the identity of the trader and options for seeking redress;
	(c) compile and make publicly available through application programming interfaces a repository containing information about illegal products and services removed from its platform in the past twelve months along with information about the concerned trader and options for seeking redress.
	2. Online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall maintain an internal database of illegal products and services removed and/or recipients suspended pursuant to Article 20.

Amendment  278

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average and median time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed;

Amendment  279

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of manifestly illegal content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints;	(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of illegal content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints;

Amendment  280

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) the number of advertisements that were removed, labelled or disabled by the online platform and justification of the decisions.

Amendment  281

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall publish, at least once every six months, information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in each Member State, calculated as an average over the period of the past six months, in accordance with the methodology laid down in the delegated acts adopted pursuant to Article 25(2).	2. Online platforms shall publish, at least once every twelve months, information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in each Member State, calculated as an average over the period of the past six months, in accordance with the methodology laid down in the delegated acts adopted pursuant to Article 25(2).

Amendment  282

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Member States shall refrain from imposing additional transparency reporting obligations on the online platforms, other than specific requests in connection with the exercise of their supervisory powers.

Amendment  283

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The Commission may adopt implementing acts to lay down templates concerning the form, content and other details of reports pursuant to paragraph 1.	4. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to establish a set of key performance indicators and lay down templates concerning the form, content and other details of reports pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment  284

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear and unambiguous manner and in real time:	1. Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear, concise, and unambiguous manner and in real time:

Amendment  285

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) that the information displayed is an advertisement;	(a) that the information displayed on the interface or parts thereof is an online advertisement, including through prominent and harmonised marking;

Amendment  286

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement where this person is different from the natural or legal person referred to in point (b);

Amendment  287

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) meaningful information about the main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed.	(c) clear, meaningful, and uniform information about the parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed, and where applicable about how to change those parameters.

Amendment  288

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Online platforms shall ensure that recipients of the service can easily make an informed choice when exercising their consent for processing their personal data in accordance with the Regulation 2016/679 for the purposes of targeted advertising by providing them with meaningful information, including information about how their data will be monetised. Online platforms shall ensure that refusing consent shall be no more difficult or time-consuming to the recipient than giving consent.

Amendment  289

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. The personal data referred to in paragraph 2 shall not be used for commercial purposes related to direct marketing, profiling and behaviourally targeted advertising of minors.

Amendment  290

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 24a
	Recommender system transparency
	1.  Online platforms shall set out in their terms and conditions and via a designated online resource that can be directly reached and easily found from the online platform’s online interface when content is recommended, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipient of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they have made available.
	2. The main parameters referred to in paragraph 1 shall include, at a minimum:
	(a) the main criteria used by the relevant system which individually or collectively are most significant in determining recommendations;
	(b) the relative importance of those parameters;
	(c) what objectives the relevant system has been optimised for; and
	(d) if applicable, an explanation of the role that the behaviour of the recipients of the service plays in how the relevant system produces its outputs.
	The requirements set out in paragraph 2 shall be without prejudice to rules on protection of trade secrets and intellectual property rights.
	3. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, online platforms shall provide a clear and easily accessible function on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them.

Amendment  291

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 24b
	Additional obligations for platforms primarily used for the dissemination of user-generated pornographic content
	Where an online platform is primarily used for the dissemination of user generated pornographic content, the platform shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure:
	(a) that users who disseminate content have verified themselves through a double opt-in e-mail and cell phone registration;
	(b) professional human content moderation, trained to identify image-based sexual abuse, including content having a high probability of being illegal;
	(c) the accessibility of a qualified notification procedure in the form that, additionally to the mechanism referred to in Article 14, individuals may notify the platform with the claim that image material depicting them or purporting to be depicting them is being disseminated without their consent and supply the platform with prima facie evidence of their physical identity; content notified through this procedure is to be suspended without undue delay.

Amendment  292

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3.	1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which:
	(a) provide for at least four consecutive months their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3. Such a methodology shall take into account, in particular:
	(i) the number of active recipients shall be based on each service individually;
	(ii) active recipients connected on multiple devices are counted only once;
	(iii) indirect use of service, via a third party or linking, shall not be counted;
	(iv) where an online platform is hosted by another provider of intermediary services, that the active recipients are assigned solely to the online platform closest to the recipient;
	(v) that automated interactions, accounts or data scans by a non-human (“bots”) are not included.

Amendment  293

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific methodology for calculating the number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, for the purposes of paragraph 1. The methodology shall specify, in particular, how to determine the Union’s population and criteria to determine the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, taking into account different accessibility features.	3. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific methodology for calculating the number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, for the purposes of paragraph 1(a). The methodology shall specify, in particular, how to determine the Union’s population and criteria to determine the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, taking into account different accessibility features.

Amendment  294

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks:	1. Very large online platforms shall effectively and diligently identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, and in any event before launching new services, the probability and severity of any significant systemic risks stemming from, the design, algorithmic systems, intrinsic characteristics, functioning and use made of their services in the Union. The risk assessment shall take into account risks per Member State in which services are offered and in the Union as a whole, in particular to a specific language or region. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and activities, including technology design, business-model choices, and shall include the following systemic risks:

Amendment  295

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the dissemination of illegal content through their services;	(a) the dissemination of illegal content through their services or content that is in breach with their terms and conditions;

Amendment  296

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively;	(b) any actual and foreseeable negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights, including for consumer protection, to respect for human dignity, private and family life, the protection of personal data and the freedom of expression and information, as well as to the freedom and the pluralism of the media, the prohibition of discrimination, the right to gender equality, and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 1, 7, 8, 11, 21, 23, 24 and 38 of the Charter respectively;

Amendment  297

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security.	(c) any malfunctioning or intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service or risks inherent to the intended operation of the service, including the amplification of illegal content, of content that is in breach with their terms and conditions or any other content with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of minors and of other vulnerable groups of recipients of the service, on democratic values, media freedom, freedom of expression and civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security;

Amendment  298

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) any actual and foreseeable negative effects on the protection of public health as well as behavioural addictions or other serious negative consequences to the person's physical, mental, social and financial well-being.

Amendment  299

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.	2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, whether and how their content moderation systems, terms and conditions, community standards, algorithmic systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement, as well as the underlying data collection, processing and profiling, influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.

Amendment  300

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall consult, where appropriate, representatives of the recipients of the service, representatives of groups potentially impacted by their services, independent experts and civil society organisations. Their involvement shall be tailored to the specific systemic risks that the very large online platform aim to assess.

Amendment  301

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. The supporting documents of the risk assessment shall be communicated to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and to the Commission.

Amendment  302

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. The obligations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall by no means lead to a general monitoring obligation.

Amendment  303

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:	1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, transparent, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:

Amendment  304

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) adapting content moderation or recommender systems, their decision-making processes, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions;	(a) adapting content moderation, algorithmic systems, or recommender systems and online interfaces, their decision-making processes, the design, the features or functioning of their services, their advertising model or their terms and conditions;

Amendment  305

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) ensuring appropriate resources to deal with notices and internal complaints, including appropriate technical and operational measures or capacities;

Amendment  306

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) targeted measures aimed at limiting the display of advertisements in association with the service they provide;	(b) targeted measures aimed at limiting the display of advertisements in association with the service they provide, or the alternative placement and display of public service advertisements or other related factual information;

Amendment  307

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) where relevant, targeted measures aimed at adapting online interfaces and features to protect minors;

Amendment  308

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) reinforcing the internal processes or supervision of any of their activities in particular as regards detection of systemic risk;	(c) reinforcing the internal processes, and resources, testing, documentation, or supervision of any of their activities in particular as regards detection of systemic risk;

Amendment  309

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Very large online platforms shall, where appropriate, design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, independent experts and civil society organisations. Where no such involvement is foreseen, this shall be made clear in the transparency report referred to in Article 33.

Amendment  310

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. Very large online platforms shall provide a detailed list of the risk mitigation measures taken and their justification to the independent auditors in order to prepare the audit report referred to in Article 28.

Amendment  311

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. The Commission shall evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of mitigating measures undertaken by very large online platforms referred to in Article 27(1) and where necessary, may issue recommendations.

Amendment  312

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year, which shall include the following:	2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year. The reports shall include the following:

Amendment  313

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic risks reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Article 31 and 33;	(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic risks reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Articles 30, 31 and 33;

Amendment  314

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The reports shall be presented per Member State in which the systemic risks occurred and in the Union as a whole. The reports shall be published in all the official languages of the Member States of the Union.

Amendment  315

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue general guidelines on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific risks, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those guidelines the Commission shall organise public consultations.	3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, and following public consultation shall issue general guidelines on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific risks, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved.

Amendment  316

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The requirement to put in place mitigation measures shall not lead to a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligations.

Amendment  317

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to audits to assess compliance with the following:	1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to independent audits to assess compliance with the following:

Amendment  318

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Very large online platforms shall ensure auditors have access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly.

Amendment  319

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by organisations which:	2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by organisations which having been recognised and vetted by the Commission and which:

Amendment  320

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) are independent from the very large online platform concerned;	(a) are legally and financially independent from, and do not have conflicts of interest with the very large online platform concerned and other very large online platforms;

Amendment  321

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) auditors and their employees have not provided any other service to the very large online platform audited 12 months before the audit and commit not to work for the very large online platform audited or a professional organisation or business association of which the platform is a member for 12 months after their position in the auditing organisation has ended;

Amendment  322

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The organisations that perform the audits shall establish an audit report for each audit. The report shall be in writing and include at least the following:	3. The organisations that perform the audits shall establish an audit report for each audit subject as referred to in paragraph 1. The report shall be in writing and include at least the following:

Amendment  323

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) a declaration of interests;

Amendment  324

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) a description of the main findings drawn from the audit;	(d) a description of the main findings drawn from the audit and a summary of the main findings;

Amendment  325

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) a description of the third parties consulted as part of the audit;

Amendment  326

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) a description of specific elements that could not be audited, and an explanation of why these could not be audited;

Amendment  327

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fb) where the audit opinion could not reach a conclusion for specific elements within the scope of the audit, a statement of reasons for the failure to reach such conclusion.

Amendment  328

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The Commission shall publish and regularly update a list of vetted organisations.

Amendment  329

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. Where a very large online platform receives a positive audit report, it shall be entitled to request from the Commission a seal of excellence.

Amendment  330

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.	1. In addition to the requirements set out in Article 24a, very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall provide at least one recommender system which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as well as an easily accessible functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them.

Amendment  331

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, very large online platforms shall provide an easily accessible functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them.	deleted

Amendment  332

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall compile and make publicly available through application programming interfaces a repository containing the information referred to in paragraph 2, until one year after the advertisement was displayed for the last time on their online interfaces. They shall ensure that the repository does not contain any personal data of the recipients of the service to whom the advertisement was or could have been displayed.	1. Very large online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall compile and make publicly available and searchable through easy to access, efficient and reliable tools through application programming interfaces a repository containing the information referred to in paragraph 2, until one year after the advertisement was displayed for the last time on their online interfaces. They shall ensure that multicriterion queries can be performed per advertiser and per all data points present in the advertisement, the target of the advertisement, and the audience the advertiser wishes to reach. They shall ensure that the repository does not contain any personal data of the recipients of the service to whom the advertisement was or could have been displayed and shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the information is accurate and complete.

Amendment  333

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the content of the advertisement;	(a) the content of the advertisement, including the name of the product, service or brand and the object of the advertisement;

Amendment  334

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the natural or legal person who paid for the advertisement, where that person is different from the one referred to in point (b);

Amendment  335

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) whether the advertisement was intended to be displayed specifically to one or more particular groups of recipients of the service and if so, the main parameters used for that purpose;	(d) whether the advertisement was intended to be displayed specifically to one or more particular groups of recipients of the service and if so, the main parameters used for that purpose including any parameters used to exclude particular groups;

Amendment  336

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) where it is disclosed, a copy of the content of commercial communications published on the very large online platforms that are not marketed, sold or arranged by the very large online platform, which have through appropriate channels been declared as such to the very large online platform;

Amendment  337

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) cases where the advertisement was removed on the basis of a notice submitted in accordance with Article 14 or an order issued pursuant to Article 8.

Amendment  338

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Board shall, after consulting vetted researchers, publish guidelines on the structure and organisation on repositories created pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment  339

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 30a
	Deep fakes
	Where a very large online platform becomes aware that a piece of content is a generated or manipulated image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful (deep fakes), the provider shall label the content in a way that informs that the content is inauthentic and that is clearly visible for the recipient of the services.

Amendment  340

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, specified in the request, access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only use that data for those purposes.	1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, and without delay specified in the request, access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only request, access and use that data for those purposes.

Amendment  341

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The very large online platform shall be obliged to explain the design, logic and the functioning of the algorithms if requested by the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment.

Amendment  342

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1).	2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers, vetted not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations, who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification, mitigation and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1) and Article 27(1).

Amendment  343

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Vetted researchers, vetted not-for-profit bodies, organisations and associations shall have access to aggregate numbers for the total views and view rate of content prior to a removal on the basis of orders issued in accordance with Article 8 or content moderation engaged in at the provider’s own initiative and under its terms and conditions.

Amendment  344

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate.	3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate, and with an easily accessible and user-friendly mechanism to search for multiple criteria.

Amendment  345

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. In order to be vetted, researchers shall be affiliated with academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests, have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.	4. In order to be vetted by the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, researchers, not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations shall:
	(a) be affiliated with academic institutions or civil society organisations representing the public interest and meeting the requirements under Article 68;
	(b) be independent from commercial interests, including from any very large online platform;
	(c) disclose the funding financing the research;
	(d) be independent from any government, administrative or other state bodies, outside the academic institution of affiliation if public;
	(e) have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies; and
	(f) preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.

Amendment  346

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Where a very large online platform has grounds to believe that a researcher, a not-for-profit body, an organisation or association is acting outside the purpose of paragraph 2 or no longer respects the conditions of paragraph 4, it shall immediately inform the relevant authority, either the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, which shall decide without undue delay if access shall be withdrawn and when the access shall be restored and under what conditions.

Amendment  347

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. Where the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, or the Commission have grounds to believe that a researcher, a not-for-profit body, an organisation or association is acting outside the purpose of paragraph 2 or no longer respects the conditions of paragraph 4, it shall immediately inform the very large online platform. The very large online platform shall be entitled to withdraw access to data upon receiving the information. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, or the Commission shall decide if and when access shall be restored and under what conditions.

Amendment  348

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, adopt delegated acts laying down the technical conditions under which very large online platforms are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 and the purposes for which the data may be used. Those delegated acts shall lay down the specific conditions under which such sharing of data with vetted researchers can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, taking into account the rights and interests of the very large online platforms and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, and maintaining the security of their service.	5. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, and no later than one year after entry into force of this legislation, adopt delegated acts laying down the technical conditions under which very large online platforms are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 and the purposes for which the data may be used. Those delegated acts shall lay down the specific conditions under which such sharing of data with vetted researchers or not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, taking into account the rights and interests of the very large online platforms and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, and maintaining the security of their service.

Amendment  349

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) giving access to the data will lead to significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service or the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets.	(b) giving access to the data will lead to significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service or the protection of confidential information.

Amendment  350

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7a. Digital Service Coordinators and the Commission shall, once a year, report the following information:
	(a) the number of requests made to them as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 6;
	(b) the number of such requests that have been declined or withdrawn by the Digital Service Coordinator or the Commission and the reasons for which they have been declined or withdrawn, including following a request to the Digital Service Coordinator or the Commission from a very large online platform to amend a request as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 6.

Amendment  351

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 7 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7b. Upon completion of their research, the vetted researchers that have been granted access to data shall publish their findings without disclosing confidential data and in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment  352

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Very large online platforms shall only designate as compliance officers persons who have the professional qualifications, knowledge, experience and ability necessary to fulfil the tasks referred to in paragraph 3. Compliance officers may either be staff members of, or fulfil those tasks on the basis of a contract with, the very large online platform concerned.	2. Very large online platforms shall only designate persons who have the professional qualifications, knowledge, experience and ability necessary to fulfil the tasks referred to in paragraph 3 as compliance officers. Compliance officers may either be staff members of, or fulfil those tasks on the basis of a contract with, the very large online platform concerned.

Amendment  353

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 32 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) cooperating with the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Commission for the purpose of this Regulation;	(a) cooperating with the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Board and the Commission for the purpose of this Regulation;

Amendment  354

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall publish the reports referred to in Article 13 within six months from the date of application referred to in Article 25(4), and thereafter every six months.	1. Very large online platforms shall publish the reports referred to in Article 13 within six months from the date of application referred to in Article 25(4), and thereafter every six months in a standardised, machine-readable and easily accessible format.

Amendment  355

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Such reports shall include content moderation information separated and presented for each Member State in which the services are offered and for the Union as a whole. The reports shall be published in at least one of the official languages of the Member States of the Union in which services are offered.

Amendment  356

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the related risk mitigation measures identified and implemented pursuant to Article 27;	(b) the specific mitigation measures identified and implemented pursuant to Article 27;

Amendment  357

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) where appropriate, information about the representatives of the recipients of the service, independent experts and civil society organisations, consulted for the risk assessment in accordance with Article 26.

Amendment  358

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Where a very large online platform considers that the publication of information pursuant to paragraph 2 may result in the disclosure of confidential information of that platform or of the recipients of the service, may cause significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service, may undermine public security or may harm recipients, the platform may remove such information from the reports. In that case, that platform shall transmit the complete reports to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Commission, accompanied by a statement of the reasons for removing the information from the public reports.	3. Where a very large online platform considers that the publication of information pursuant to paragraph 2 may result in the disclosure of confidential information of that platform or of the recipients of the service, may cause significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service, may undermine public security or may harm recipients, the platform may remove such information from the reports. In that case, that platform shall transmit the complete reports to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Commission, accompanied by a statement of the reasons for removing the information from the public reports, in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment  359

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall support and promote the development and implementation of voluntary industry standards set by relevant European and international standardisation bodies at least for the following:	1. The Commission shall support and promote the development and implementation of voluntary standards set by relevant European and international standardisation bodies, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012, at least for the following:

Amendment  360

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) terms and conditions under Article 12, including as regards acceptance of and changes to those terms and conditions;

Amendment  361

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ab) information on traceability of traders under Article 22;

Amendment  362

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ac) advertising practices under Article 24 and recommender systems under Article 24a;

Amendment  363

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) transparency reporting obligations pursuant to Article 13;

Amendment  364

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fb) technical specifications to ensure that intermediary services shall be made accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance with the accessibility requirements of Directive 2019/882.

Amendment  365

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The Commission shall support and promote the development and implementation of voluntary standards set by the relevant European and international standardisation bodies aimed at the protection of minors.

Amendment  366

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing acts laying down common specifications for the items listed in points (a) to (fb) of paragraph 1 where the Commission has requested one or more European standardisation organisations to draft a harmonised standard and there has not been a publication of the reference to that standard in the Official Journal of the European Union within [24 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] or the request has not been accepted by any of the European standardisation organisations.

Amendment  367

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission and the Board shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking into account in particular the specific challenges of tackling different types of illegal content and systemic risks, in accordance with Union law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data.	1. The Commission and the Board shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking into account in particular the specific challenges of tackling different types of illegal content and systemic risks, in accordance with Union law. Particular attention shall be given to avoiding negative effects on fair competition, data access and security, the general monitoring prohibition and the protection of privacy and personal data. The Commission and the Board shall also encourage and facilitate regular review and adaption of the Codes of conduct to ensure that they are fit for purpose.

Amendment  368

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.	2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may request the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as relevant competent authorities, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.

Amendment  369

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. When giving effect to paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission and the Board shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct clearly set out their objectives, contain key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives and take due account of the needs and interests of all interested parties, including citizens, at Union level. The Commission and the Board shall also aim to ensure that participants report regularly to the Commission and their respective Digital Service Coordinators of establishment on any measures taken and their outcomes, as measured against the key performance indicators that they contain.	3. When giving effect to paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission and the Board shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct clearly set out their specific objectives, define the nature of the public policy objective pursued and, where appropriate, the role of competent authorities, contain key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives and take fully into account of the needs and interests of all interested parties, and in particular citizens, at Union level. The Commission and the Board shall also aim to ensure that participants report regularly to the Commission and their respective Digital Service Coordinators of establishment on any measures taken and their outcomes, as measured against the key performance indicators that they contain. Key performance indicators and reporting commitments shall take into account differences in size and capacity between different participants.

Amendment  370

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The Commission and the Board shall assess whether the codes of conduct meet the aims specified in paragraphs 1 and 3, and shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. They shall publish their conclusions.	4. The Commission and the Board shall assess whether the codes of conduct meet the aims specified in paragraphs 1 and 3, and shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. They shall publish their conclusions and request that the organisations involved amend their codes of conduct accordingly.

Amendment  371

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 35 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. The Board shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of conduct, having regard to the key performance indicators that they may contain.	5. The Commission and the Board shall regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of conduct, having regard to the key performance indicators that they may contain. In case of systematic failure to comply with the Codes of Conduct, the Commission and the Board may take a decision to temporarily suspend or definitively exclude platforms that do not meet their commitments as signatories to the codes of conduct.

Amendment  372

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level between, online platforms and other relevant service providers, such as providers of online advertising intermediary services or organisations representing recipients of the service and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to contribute to further transparency in online advertising beyond the requirements of Articles 24 and 30.	1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level between, online platforms and other relevant service providers, such as providers of online advertising intermediary services or organisations representing recipients of the service and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to contribute to further transparency for all actors in the online advertising eco-system, beyond the requirements of Articles 24 and 30.

Amendment  373

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct pursue an effective transmission of information, in full respect for the rights and interests of all parties involved, and a competitive, transparent and fair environment in online advertising, in accordance with Union and national law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct address at least:	2. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct pursue an effective transmission of information, in full respect for the rights and interests of all parties involved, and a competitive, transparent and fair environment in online advertising, in accordance with Union and national law, in particular on competition and the protection of privacy and personal data. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct address at least:

Amendment  374

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the different types of data that can be used.

Amendment  375

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission shall encourage the development of the codes of conduct within one year following the date of application of this Regulation and their application no later than six months after that date.	3. The Commission shall encourage the development of the codes of conduct within one year following the date of application of this Regulation and their application no later than six months after that date. The Commission shall evaluate the application of those codes three years after the application of this Regulation.

Amendment  376

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The Commission shall encourage all the actors in the online advertising eco-system referred to in paragraph 1 to endorse and comply with the commitments stated in the codes of conduct.

Amendment  377

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Board may recommend the Commission to initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health.	1. The Board may recommend the Commission to initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of voluntary crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health.

Amendment  378

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) measures to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities during implementation of crisis protocols, including by providing accessible description about these protocols.

Amendment  379

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. If the Commission considers that a crisis protocol fails to effectively address the crisis situation, or to safeguard the exercise of fundamental rights as referred to in point (e) of paragraph 4, it may request the participants to revise the crisis protocol, including by taking additional measures.	5. If the Commission considers that a crisis protocol fails to effectively address the crisis situation, or to safeguard the exercise of fundamental rights as referred to in point (e) of paragraph 4, it shall request the participants to revise the crisis protocol, including by taking additional measures.

Amendment  380

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities, referred to in paragraph 1 and in particular their Digital Services Coordinators, have adequate technical financial and human resources to carry out their tasks under this Regulation.

Amendment  381

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators perform their tasks under this Regulation in an impartial, transparent and timely manner. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators have adequate technical, financial and human resources to carry out their tasks.	1. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators perform their tasks under this Regulation in an impartial, transparent and timely manner.

Amendment  382

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Member State in which the main establishment of the provider of intermediary services is located shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV of this Regulation.	1. The Member State in which the main establishment of the provider of intermediary services is located shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of the supervision and enforcement by the national competent authorities, in accordance with this Chapter, of the obligations imposed on intermediaries under this Regulation.

Amendment  383

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. A provider of intermediary services which does not have an establishment in the Union but which offers services in the Union shall, for the purposes of Chapters III and IV, be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its legal representative resides or is established.	2. A provider of intermediary services which does not have an establishment in the Union but which offers services in the Union shall, for the purposes of this Article, be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its legal representative resides or is established.

Amendment  384

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 40 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Where a provider of intermediary services fails to appoint a legal representative in accordance with Article 11, all Member States shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV. Where a Member State decides to exercise jurisdiction under this paragraph, it shall inform all other Member States and ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected.	3. Where a provider of intermediary services fails to appoint a legal representative in accordance with Article 11, all Member States shall have jurisdiction for the purposes of this Article. Where a Member State decides to exercise jurisdiction under this paragraph, it shall inform all other Member States and ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected.

Amendment  385

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the power to require those providers, as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may reasonably be aware of information relating to a suspected infringement of this Regulation, including, organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information within a reasonable time period;	(a) the power to require those providers, as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may reasonably be aware of information relating to a suspected infringement of this Regulation, including, organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information without undue delay, or at the latest within three months;

Amendment  386

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the power to adopt interim measures to avoid the risk of serious harm.	(e) the power to adopt proportionate interim measures or to request the relevant judicial authority to do so, to avoid the risk of serious harm.

Amendment  387

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
As regards points (c) and (d) of the first subparagraph, Digital Services Coordinators shall also have the enforcement powers set out in those points in respect of the other persons referred to in paragraph 1 for failure to comply with any of the orders issued to them pursuant to that paragraph. They shall only exercise those enforcement powers after having provided those others persons in good time with all relevant information relating to such orders, including the applicable time period, the fines or periodic payments that may be imposed for failure to comply and redress possibilities.	As regards points (c) and (d) of the first subparagraph, Digital Services Coordinators shall also have the enforcement powers set out in those points in respect of the other persons referred to in paragraph 1 for failure to comply with any of the orders issued to them pursuant to that paragraph. They shall only exercise those enforcement powers after having provided those other persons in good time with all relevant information relating to such orders, including the applicable time period, the fines or periodic payments that may be imposed for failure to comply and redress possibilities.

Amendment  388

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Where needed for carrying out their tasks, Digital Services Coordinators shall also have, in respect of providers of intermediary services under the jurisdiction of their Member State, where all other powers pursuant to this Article to bring about the cessation of an infringement have been exhausted, the infringement persists and causes serious harm which cannot be avoided through the exercise of other powers available under Union or national law, the power to take the following measures:	3. Where needed for carrying out their tasks, Digital Services Coordinators shall also have, in respect of providers of intermediary services under the jurisdiction of their Member State, where all other powers pursuant to this Article to bring about the cessation of an infringement have been exhausted, the infringement persists or is continuously repeated and causes serious harm which cannot be avoided through the exercise of other powers available under Union or national law, the power to take the following measures:

Amendment  389

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) require the management body of the providers, within a reasonable time period, to examine the situation, adopt and submit an action plan setting out the necessary measures to terminate the infringement, ensure that the provider takes those measures, and report on the measures taken;	(a) require the management body of the providers, within a reasonable time period, which shall in any case not exceed three months, to examine the situation, adopt and submit an action plan setting out the necessary measures to terminate the infringement, ensure that the provider takes those measures, and report on the measures taken;

Amendment  390

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 3 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) where the Digital Services Coordinator considers that the provider has not sufficiently complied with the requirements of the first indent, that the infringement persists and causes serious harm, and that the infringement entails a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons, request the competent judicial authority of that Member State to order the temporary restriction of access of recipients of the service concerned by the infringement or, only where that is not technically feasible, to the online interface of the provider of intermediary services on which the infringement takes place.	(b) where the Digital Services Coordinator considers that the provider has not complied with the requirements of the first indent, that the infringement persists or is continuously repeated and causes serious harm, and that the infringement entails a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons, request the competent judicial authority of that Member State to order the temporary restriction of access of recipients of the service concerned by the infringement or, only where that is not technically feasible, to the online interface of the provider of intermediary services on which the infringement takes place.

Amendment  391

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6a. The Commission shall publish guidelines by [six months after the entry into force of this Regulation] on the powers of and procedures applicable to the Digital Services Coordinators.

Amendment  392

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendments affecting them.	2. Penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify the Commission and the Board of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendments affecting them.

Amendment  393

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual income or turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information and to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1% of the annual income or turnover of the provider concerned.	3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual worldwide turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information and to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1% of the annual worldwide turnover of the provider concerned.

Amendment  394

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.	4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily worldwide turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.

Amendment  395

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Member States shall ensure that administrative or judicial authorities issuing orders pursuant to Article 8 and 9 shall only issue penalties or fines in line with this Article.

Amendment  396

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Recipients of the service shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority.	1. Recipients of the service, , shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. During these proceedings, both parties shall have the right to be heard and receive appropriate information about the status of the proceedings. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment without undue delay. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority, without undue delay.

Amendment  397

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a.  Upon receipt of the complaint, transmitted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall assess the matter in a timely manner and shall inform within six months the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established if it intends to proceed with an investigation. If it opens an investigation, it shall provide an update at least every three months. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established shall consequently inform the recipient.

Amendment  398

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 43a
	Compensation
	Without prejudice to Article 5, recipients of the service shall have the right to seek, in accordance with relevant Union and national law compensation from providers of intermediary services, against any direct damage or loss suffered due to an infringement by providers of intermediary services of obligations established under this Regulation.

Amendment  399

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Digital Services Coordinators shall draw up an annual report on their activities under this Regulation. They shall make the annual reports available to the public, and shall communicate them to the Commission and to the Board.	1. Digital Services Coordinators shall draw up an annual report on their activities under this Regulation. They shall make the annual reports in a standardised and machine-readable format available to the public, and shall communicate them to the Commission and to the Board.

Amendment  400

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the number and subject matter of orders to act against illegal content and orders to provide information issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 by any national judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the Digital Services Coordinator concerned;	(a) the number and subject matter of orders to act against illegal content and orders to provide information issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9 by any national judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the Digital Services Coordinator concerned, including information on the name of the issuing authority, the name of the provider and the type of action specified in the order, as well as a justification that the order complies with Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC;

Amendment  401

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the effects given to those orders, as communicated to the Digital Services Coordinator pursuant to Articles 8 and 9.	(b) the effects given to those orders, as communicated to the Digital Services Coordinator pursuant to Articles 8 and 9, the number of appeals made against those orders, as well as the outcome of the appeals.

Amendment  402

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 44 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall make publicly available a biennial report analysing the annual reports, communicated pursuant to paragraph 1 and shall submit it to the European Parliament and to the Council.

Amendment  403

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the Board has reasons to suspect that a provider of intermediary services infringed this Regulation in a manner involving at least three Member States, it may recommend the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory and enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation.	Where the Board has reasons to suspect that a provider of intermediary services infringed this Regulation in a manner involving at least three Member States, it may request the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory and enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation.

Amendment  404

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. A request or recommendation pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least indicate:	2. A request pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least indicate:

Amendment  405

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. A request pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be at the same time communicated to the Commission. Where the Commission believes that the request is not justified or where the Commission is currently taking action on the same matter, the Commission can ask for the request to be withdrawn.

Amendment  406

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall take into utmost account the request or recommendation pursuant to paragraph 1. Where it considers that it has insufficient information to act upon the request or recommendation and has reasons to consider that the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or the Board, could provide additional information, it may request such information. The time period laid down in paragraph 4 shall be suspended until that additional information is provided.	3. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall take into utmost account the request pursuant to paragraph 1. Where it considers that it has insufficient information to act upon the request and has reasons to consider that the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or the Board, could provide additional information, it may request such information. The time period laid down in paragraph 4 shall be suspended until that additional information is provided.

Amendment  407

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall, without undue delay and in any event not later than two months following receipt of the request or recommendation, communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or the Board, its assessment of the suspected infringement, or that of any other competent authority pursuant to national law where relevant, and an explanation of any investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged in relation thereto to ensure compliance with this Regulation.	4. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall, without undue delay and in any event not later than two months following receipt of the request, communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or the Board, its assessment of the suspected infringement, or that of any other competent authority pursuant to national law where relevant, and an explanation of any investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged in relation thereto to ensure compliance with this Regulation.

Amendment  408

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Where the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or, where appropriate, the Board, did not receive a reply within the time period laid down in paragraph 4 or where it does not agree with the assessment of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, it may refer the matter to the Commission, providing all relevant information. That information shall include at least the request or recommendation sent to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, any additional information provided pursuant to paragraph 3 and the communication referred to in paragraph 4.	5. Where the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or, where appropriate, the Board, did not receive a reply within the time period laid down in paragraph 4 or where it does not agree with the assessment of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, it may refer the matter to the Commission, providing all relevant information. That information shall include at least the request sent to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, any additional information provided pursuant to paragraph 3 and the communication referred to in paragraph 4.

Amendment  409

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 45 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
7. Where, pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission concludes that the assessment or the investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged pursuant to paragraph 4 are incompatible with this Regulation, it shall request the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment to further assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory or enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation, and to inform it about those measures taken within two months from that request.	7. Where, pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission concludes that the assessment or the investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged pursuant to paragraph 4 are incompatible with this Regulation, it shall request the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment to further assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory or enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation, and to inform it about those measures taken within two months from that request. This information shall be also transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator or the Board that initiated the proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1.

Amendment  410

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Such joint investigations are without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the participating Digital Coordinators and the requirements applicable to the performance of those tasks and exercise of those powers provided in this Regulation. The participating Digital Services Coordinators shall make the results of the joint investigations available to other Digital Services Coordinators, the Commission and the Board through the system provided for in Article 67 for the fulfilment of their respective tasks under this Regulation.	deleted

Amendment  411

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 46 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where a Digital Services Coordinator of establishment has reasons to suspect that a provider of intermediary services has infringed this Regulation in a manner involving at least one other Member State, it may propose to the Digital Services Coordinator of destination concerned to launch a joint investigation. The joint investigation shall be based on an agreement between the Member States concerned.

Amendment  412

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 46 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. Upon request of the Digital Services Coordinator of destination who has reasons to suspect that a provider of intermediary services has infringed this Regulation in its Member State, the Board may recommend to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to launch a joint investigation with the Digital Services Coordinator of destination concerned. The joint investigation shall be based on an agreement between the Member States concerned.
	Where there is no agreement within one month, the joint investigation shall be under the supervision of the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment.
	Such joint investigations are without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the participating Digital Services Coordinators and the requirements applicable to the performance of those tasks and exercise of those powers provided in this Regulation. The participating Digital Services Coordinators shall make the results of the joint investigations available to other Digital Services Coordinators, the Commission and the Board through the system provided for in Article 67 for the fulfilment of their respective tasks under this Regulation.

Amendment  413

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) coordinating and contributing to guidance and analysis of the Commission and Digital Services Coordinators and other competent authorities on emerging issues across the internal market with regard to matters covered by this Regulation;	(b) coordinating and providing guidance and analysis to the Commission and Digital Services Coordinators and other competent authorities on emerging issues across the internal market with regard to matters covered by this Regulation;

Amendment  414

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) contributing to the effective application of Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC to prevent fragmentation of the digital single market;

Amendment  415

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) contribute to the effective cooperation with the competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations.

Amendment  416

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Board shall be composed of the Digital Services Coordinators, who shall be represented by high-level officials. Where provided for by national law, other competent authorities entrusted with specific operational responsibilities for the application and enforcement of this Regulation alongside the Digital Services Coordinator shall participate in the Board. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them.	1. The Board shall be composed of the Digital Services Coordinators, who shall be represented by high-level officials. Where provided for by national law, other competent authorities entrusted with specific operational responsibilities for the application and enforcement of this Regulation alongside the Digital Services Coordinator, may participate in the Board. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them. The meeting shall be deemed valid where at least two thirds of its members are present.

Amendment  417

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commission shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance with the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure.

Amendment  418

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Each Member State shall have one vote. The Commission shall not have voting rights.	2. Each Member State shall have one vote, to be cast by the Digital Services Coordinator. The Commission shall not have voting rights.

Amendment  419

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Board shall be chaired by the Commission. The Commission shall convene the meetings and prepare the agenda in accordance the tasks of the Board pursuant to this Regulation and with its rules of procedure.	deleted

Amendment  420

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. The Board may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings, and may cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, as well as external experts as appropriate. The Board shall make the results of this cooperation publicly available.	5. The Board may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings, and shall cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, as well as external experts as appropriate. The Board shall make the results of this cooperation publicly available.

Amendment  421

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. The Board shall, where appropriate, consult interested parties and shall make the results of that consultation publicly available.

Amendment  422

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 48 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure, following the consent of the Commission.	6. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members, following the consent of the Commission.

Amendment  423

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) issue specific recommendations for the implementation of Article 13a;

Amendment  424

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) advise the Commission to take the measures referred to in Article 51 and, where requested by the Commission, adopt opinions on draft Commission measures concerning very large online platforms in accordance with this Regulation;	(d) advise the Commission to take the measures referred to in Article 51 and adopt opinions on draft Commission measures concerning very large online platforms in accordance with this Regulation;

Amendment  425

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) monitor the compliance with Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC of measures taken by a Member State restricting the freedom to provide services of intermediary service providers from another Member State and ensure that those measures are strictly necessary and do not restrict the application of this Regulation;

Amendment  426

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) support and promote the development and implementation of European standards, guidelines, reports, templates and code of conducts as provided for in this Regulation, as well as the identification of emerging issues, with regard to matters covered by this Regulation.	(e) support and promote the development and implementation of European standards, guidelines, reports, templates and code of conducts in close collaboration with relevant stakeholders as provided for in this Regulation, including by issuing opinions, recommendations or advice on matters related to Article 34, as well as the identification of emerging issues, with regard to matters covered by this Regulation.

Amendment  427

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Digital Services Coordinators and other national competent authorities that do not follow the opinions, requests or recommendations addressed to them adopted by the Board shall provide the reasons for this choice when reporting pursuant to this Regulation or when adopting their relevant decisions, as appropriate.	2. Digital Services Coordinators and other national competent authorities that do not follow the opinions, requests or recommendations addressed to them adopted by the Board shall provide the reasons for this choice and an explanation on the investigations, actions and the measures that they have implemented when reporting pursuant to this Regulation or when adopting their relevant decisions, as appropriate.

Amendment  428

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 49a
	Reports
	1. The Board shall draw up an annual report regarding its activities. The report shall be made public and be transmitted to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the Commission in all official languages of the Union.
	2. The annual report shall include, among other information, a review of the practical application of the opinions, guidelines, recommendations advice and any other measures taken under Article 49(1).

Amendment  429

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission acting on its own initiative, or the Board acting on its own initiative or upon request of at least three Digital Services Coordinators of destination, may, where it has reasons to suspect that a very large online platform infringed any of those provisions, recommend the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to investigate the suspected infringement with a view to that Digital Services Coordinator adopting such a decision within a reasonable time period.	The Commission acting on its own initiative, or the Board acting on its own initiative or upon request of at least three Digital Services Coordinators of destination, may, where it has reasons to suspect that a very large online platform infringed any of the provisions of Section 4 of Chapter III, recommend the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to investigate the suspected infringement with a view to that Digital Services Coordinator adopting such a decision within a reasonable time period and no later than three months.

Amendment  430

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 50 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. When communicating the decision referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 to the very large online platform concerned, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall request it to draw up and communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Commission and the Board, within one month from that decision, an action plan, specifying how that platform intends to terminate or remedy the infringement. The measures set out in the action plan may include, where appropriate, participation in a code of conduct as provided for in Article 35.	2. When communicating the decision referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 to the very large online platform concerned, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall request it to draw up and communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment, the Commission and the Board, within one month from that decision, an action plan, specifying how that platform intends to terminate or remedy the infringement. The measures set out in the action plan may recommend, where appropriate, participation in a code of conduct as provided for in Article 35.

Amendment  431

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 51 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Intervention by the Commission and opening of proceedings	Opening of proceedings by the Commission

Amendment  432

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission, acting either upon the Board’s recommendation or on its own initiative after consulting the Board, may initiate proceedings in view of the possible adoption of decisions pursuant to Articles 58 and 59 in respect of the relevant conduct by the very large online platform that:	1. The Commission, acting either upon the Board’s recommendation or on its own initiative after consulting the Board, shall initiate proceedings in view of the possible adoption of decisions pursuant to Articles 58 and 59 in respect of the relevant conduct by the very large online platform that:

Amendment  433

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 51 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Where the Commission decides to initiate proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall notify all Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the very large online platform concerned.	2. Where the Commission initiates proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall notify all Digital Services Coordinators, the Board and the very large online platform concerned.

Amendment  434

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 52 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may by simple request or by decision require the very large online platforms concerned, as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may be reasonably be aware of information relating to the suspected infringement or the infringement, as applicable, including organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information within a reasonable time period.	1. In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may by reasoned request or by decision require the very large online platforms concerned, their legal representatives as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may be reasonably be aware of information relating to the suspected infringement or the infringement, as applicable, including organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information within a reasonable time period

Amendment  435

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The purpose of the request shall include reasoning on why and how the information is necessary and proportionate to the objective pursued and why it cannot be received by other means.

Amendment  436

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 52 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The owners of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) or their representatives and, in the case of legal persons, companies or firms, or where they have no legal personality, the persons authorised to represent them by law or by their constitution shall supply the information requested on behalf of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1). Lawyers duly authorised to act may supply the information on behalf of their clients. The latter shall remain fully responsible if the information supplied is incomplete, incorrect or misleading.	4. The owners of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) or their representatives and, in the case of legal persons, companies or firms, or where they have no legal personality, the persons authorised to represent them by law or by their constitution shall supply the information requested on behalf of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1).

Amendment  437

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 55 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. In the context of proceedings which may lead to the adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 58(1), where there is an urgency due to the risk of serious damage for the recipients of the service, the Commission may, by decision, order interim measures against the very large online platform concerned on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement.	1. In the context of proceedings which may lead to the adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 58(1), where there is an urgency due to the risk of serious damage for the recipients of the service the Commission may, by decision, order proportionate interim measures in compliance with fundamental rights against the very large online platform concerned on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement.

Amendment  438

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 56 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission may, upon request or on its own initiative, reopen the proceedings:	2. The Commission shall reopen the proceedings:

Amendment  439

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) interim measures ordered pursuant to Article 55;	(b) interim measures ordered pursuant to Article 55; or

Amendment  440

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 58 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In the decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 the Commission shall order the very large online platform concerned to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with the decision pursuant to paragraph 1 within a reasonable time period and to provide information on the measures that that platform intends to take to comply with the decision.	3. In the decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 the Commission shall order the very large online platform concerned to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with the decision pursuant to paragraph 1 within one month and to provide information on the measures that that platform intends to take to comply with the decision.

Amendment  441

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 58 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Where the Commission finds that the conditions of paragraph 1 are not met, it shall close the investigation by a decision.	5. Where the Commission finds that the conditions of paragraph 1 are not met, it shall close the investigation by a decision. The decision shall apply with immediate effect.

Amendment  442

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. In the decision pursuant to Article 58, the Commission may impose on the very large online platform concerned fines not exceeding 6% of its total turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that that platform, intentionally or negligently:	1. In the decision pursuant to Article 58, the Commission may impose on the very large online platform concerned fines not exceeding 6% of its total worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that the platform, intentionally or negligently:

Amendment  443

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission may by decision impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1% of the total turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:	2. The Commission may by decision and in compliance with the proportionality principle impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1% of the total worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:

Amendment  444

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. In fixing the amount of the fine, the Commission shall have regard to the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement and, for fines imposed pursuant to paragraph 2, the delay caused to the proceedings.	4. In fixing the amount of the fine, the Commission shall have regard to the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement any fines issued under Article 42 for the same infringement and, for fines imposed pursuant to paragraph 2, the delay caused to the proceedings.

Amendment  445

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 60 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission may, by decision, impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), as applicable, periodic penalty payments not exceeding 5 % of the average daily turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision, in order to compel them to:	1. The Commission may, by decision, impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), as applicable, periodic penalty payments not exceeding 5 % of the average daily worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision, in order to compel them to:

Amendment  446

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 64 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall publish the decisions it adopts pursuant to Articles 55(1), 56(1), 58, 59 and 60. Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed.	1. The Commission shall publish the decisions it adopts pursuant to Articles 55(1), 56(1), 58, 59 and 60. Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, along with, where possible and justified, non-confidential documents or other forms of information on which the decision is based.

Amendment  447

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 65 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Prior to making such request to the Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission shall invite interested parties to submit written observations within a time period that shall not be less than two weeks, describing the measures it intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof.	Prior to making such request to the Digital Services Coordinator, the Commission shall invite interested parties to submit written observations within a time period that shall not be less than 14 working days describing the measures it intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof.

Amendment  448

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 66 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) the development and implementation of standards provided for in Article 34.

Amendment  449

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Without prejudice to Directive 2020/XX/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council52 , recipients of intermediary services shall have the right to mandate a body, organisation or association to exercise the rights referred to in Articles 17, 18 and 19 on their behalf, provided the body, organisation or association meets all of the following conditions:	Without prejudice to Directive (EU) 2020/1818 of the European Parliament and of the Council52 , recipients of intermediary services shall have the right to mandate a, or a body, organisation or association to exercise the rights referred to in Articles 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 43 and 43a on their behalf, provided the body, organisation or association meets all of the following conditions:
__________________	__________________
52 [Reference]	52 [Reference]

Amendment  450

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 69 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 23, 25, and 31 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of expected adoption of the Regulation].	2. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 13a, 16, 23, 25, and 31 shall be conferred on the Commission for five years starting from [date of expected adoption of the Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.

Amendment  451

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 69 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 23, 25 and 31 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.	3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 13a, 16, 23, 25, 31 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

Amendment  452

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 69 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 23, 25 and 31 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed by either the European Parliament or the Council within a period of three months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.	5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 13a, 16, 23, 25, 31 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed by either the European Parliament or the Council within a period of four months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

Amendment  453

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 70 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Digital Services Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.	1. The Commission shall be assisted by a Digital Services Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

Amendment  454

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 73 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. By five years after the entry into force of this Regulation at the latest, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.	1. By three years after the entry into force of this Regulation at the latest, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. This report shall address in particular:
	(a) the application of Article 25, including with respect to the number of average monthly active recipients of the service;
	(b) the application of Article 11;
	(c) the application of Article 14,
	(d) the application of Articles 35 and 36.

Amendment  455

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 73 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where appropriate, the report referred to in paragraph 1 shall be accompanied by a proposal for amendment of this Regulation.

Amendment  456

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 73 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the European Parliament, the Council, and other relevant bodies or sources.	3. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the European Parliament, the Council, and other relevant bodies or sources, and pay specific attention to small and medium-sized enterprises and the position of new competitors.

Amendment  457

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 74 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. It shall apply from [date - three months after its entry into force].	2. It shall apply from [date - six months after its entry into force].

 

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

 

Introduction

The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s proposal on a Digital Services Act. Digital services are an important backbone of our economy, bringing new opportunities for both consumers and businesses, using the various digital services on a daily basis.

 

At the same time digital services have created serious challenges and risks. The nature, scale and importance of digital services for the economy and society have changed dramatically since the current legislation was put into place. An updated regulatory framework on digital services, establishing clear responsibilities is necessary to address these challenges and to ensure a level playing field in the digital Single Market and a safer digital space for the users. 

 

The Rapporteur acknowledges the horizontal nature of this Regulation, but at the same time considers that the one size fits all approach fails to tackle the problems with illegal products and services sold through online marketplaces. The Rapporteur is of the opinion that stricter rules on online marketplaces must be introduced in order to create a level playing field and ensure the principle of “what is illegal offline should also be illegal online”.

 

The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s aim to increase the transparency of online advertisement and recommender systems, but is of the view that the Commission’s proposal lacks concrete obligations to ensure accountability and to prevent the amplification of illegal content. The Rapporteur thus sees a need to propose further transparency measures and requirements in order to ensure user protection by design and by default.

 

Lastly, the Rapporteur welcomes the focus on the implementation and enforcement provisions and believes that given the cross-border nature of digital services, the hybrid enforcement model suggested by the Commission could ensure an effective and efficient enforcement of this Regulation. However, the Rapporteur finds it necessary to strengthen some provisions to ensure that no Member State becomes a safe haven for online platforms.

 

 

Consumer protection and online marketplaces

Although the Rapporteur acknowledges the horizontal approach of the DSA, more specific actions must be required from online marketplaces to ensure that consumers can purchase safe products and services online. The Rapporteur welcomes certain aspects of the Commission proposal, namely the traceability of traders, the specific condition to the liability exemption targeting online marketplaces and the fact that that notices under certain conditions will be considered to give actual knowledge and thereby make online platforms liable if they do not remove the content.

 

However, in order to tackle the issue with illegal products and thus ensuring the principle of “what is illegal offline should also be illegal online” is more than just words, the Rapporteur is of the opinion that further conditions to the exemption of liability and obligations must be introduced to ensure consumer protection and a level playing field for European businesses within the digital Single Market.

 

The Rapporteur proposes a new Article laying down stricter conditions for the exemptions of liability specifically targeting online marketplaces. These conditions include amongst other things requirements to comply with certain due diligence obligations and conditions that ensures that where a trader from a third country does not have an economic operator liable for the product safety, the marketplace will not benefit from the exemption of liability. This is done to ensure liability of any product sold to European consumers, including from e-commerce. In addition, consumers will be able to seek redress for any damages the products or services have caused from the online platform.

 

Lastly, the Rapporteur proposes to strengthen the obligation on the traceability of traders, both by introducing a new article extending the scope of certain provisions presented in Article 22 to all intermediary services and by introducing new provisions targeting online marketplaces. These provisions include obligations to prevent dangerous and/or non-compliant products from being offered online and obligations to cooperate with national authorities when necessary regarding dangerous products already sold.

 

Removal of illegal content

The Rapporteur is of the opinion that illegal content should be removed from intermediary services as fast as possible while taking into account fundamental rights. The Rapporteur believes that the DSA should establish a framework for notice and takedown with clearly defined procedures, safeguards and timelines for acting on notifications on illegal content and ensure uniform procedures in all Member States. While it is necessary to grant digital platforms time to assess the legality of content, some content has a very high impact and may pose a greater threat to society or significant damage to the individual. It is thus reasonable to have two sets of timelines with shorter timeframes for such high impact content. To ensure consistency with existing legislation, the Rapporteur specifies that these deadlines are without prejudice to deadlines set in sectorial legislation or legal orders.

 

In addition, the Rapporteur welcomes the obligation introduced in Article 20 on measures and protection against misuse. However, when a user frequently provide illegal content to an interface, e.g. offer products that does not comply with EU laws, the platform should for a reasonable period of time suspend the user. This should not be limited to manifestly illegal content only.

 

Users rights

The Rapporteur also welcomes the Commission’s proposal for an internal complaint-handling system and the out-of-court dispute settlement body. However, in order to ensure an efficient procedure, the Rapporteur has proposed to include timeframes. In addition, the internal complaint-handling system should not only be available for those whose content has been removed, but also for those whose notification has been rejected.

 

The Rapporteur believes that not only national authorities and the Commission should have access to direct and efficient means of communications with intermediary services, but also the recipients of services. The Rapporteur proposes a new Article that allows recipients of services to choose between means of communication with the intermediary services.

 

Lastly, the Rapporteur is of the opinion that the addtional obligations imposed on online platforms under this Regulation chapter two, section three, should be applicable to micro and small enterprises as well except Article 23. Consumer protection law does not differentiate between small and big enterprises, and therefore the obligations should not be limited to larger platforms.

 

Online advertising

The Rapporteur firmly believes that the pervasive collecting and use of users’ data to provide targeted, micro-targeted and behavioural advertising has spiralled out of control. The Rapporteur welcomes the new transparency obligations on this issue, but believes that transparency alone cannot solve the problems related to targeted online advertisement.

 

The Rapporteur proposes a new article aiming to allow consumers to navigate through online platforms without being subject to targeted advertising. The Rapporteur, therefore, proposes that targeted advertising is set off by default and that consumers can easily opt-out. The Rapporteur also suggests that when online intermediaries process data for targeted advertising, it shall not carry out activities that can lead to pervasive tracking.

 

Furthermore, the Rapporteur proposes to extend the scope of the Article on online advertising transparency to all intermediary services and suggests new transparency provisions. The Rapporteur suggests that the intermediary services should specify among other things the person who finances the advertisement and where the advertisement has been displayed. Moreover, the intermediary service should allow access to NGOs, researchers and public authorities upon their request to information on direct and indirect payment or any remuneration received.

 

Lastly, in order to improve consumers’ awareness of commercial content the Rapporteur suggests to have prominent and harmonised markings of advertisement. Today, it is up to the individual trader to decide how to disclose the advertisement as long as this is judged as being sufficiently clear to an average consumer of the expected target group. This freedom results in a variety of different markings which makes it difficult for consumers to recognise an advertisement. Therefore, a prominent and harmonised marking for advertisement is needed. 

 

Recommender systems and algorithmic accountability

The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s recognition that recommender systems can have a significant impact on user’s ability to choose information, and that the Commission has decided to dedicate an article to address related issues. However, the Rapporteur sees the need to further strengthen the empowerment of consumers when it comes to recommender systems.

 

The Rapporteur suggests to extend the scope of the Article to all online platforms as recommender systems used on platforms with less than 45 million active users also have a significant impact on users. Furthermore, the Rapporteur proposes that any recommender system should, by default, not be based on profiling, and that consumers subject to recommender system using profiling should be able to view and delete any profiles used to curate the content they see. In addition, the Rapporteur believes that the algorithms used in recommender system should be designed in a way that prevents dark patterns and rabbit holes from happening. Moreover, the Rapporteur suggest a “must-carry” obligation to ensure that information of public interest is high-ranked in the platforms algorithms.

 

Lastly, the Rapporteur finds that greater accountability on algorithms should be introduced in the proposal. The Rapporteur suggests that the Commission should be able to assess the algorithms used by very large online platforms and determine whether they comply with a number of requirements. The Commission would be allowed to sanction in case of infringement of certain requirements.

 

Implementation and enforcement

The Rapporteur welcomes the enforcement model proposed by the Commission. However, some changes have been made in order to strengthen the model. Taking inspiration from the Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 , the Rapporteur proposes that the Digital Service Coordinator and the Commission should have the possibility to restrict access to the interface of an intermediary service, if the provider repeatedly infringe the obligations set out in this Regulation. Furthermore, the Commission should not just have the possibility to act, but should be obliged to act if it has reasons to believe that a very large online platform infringes this Regulation.

 

 

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (29.9.2021)

for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC

(COM(2020)0825 – C9-0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Henna Virkkunen

(*) Associated committee – Rule 57 of the Rules of Procedure

 

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

In its proposal for the Digital Services Act, the European Commission has set out a number of ways to improve the protection of fundamental human rights online and to create a stronger obligation of transparency and accountability for online platforms.

 

The aim of this new Regulation should be to strengthen democracy, increase fair competition and accelerate innovation. The digital world must adhere to the same European values as the rest of our societies: democracy, freedom of speech and human rights. What is illegal in offline should also be illegal online. It is also vitally important for European business, especially SMEs, that companies based in third countries but operating in the internal market follow the same rules as European companies.

 

In the draft opinion, I have limited myself to parts of the Regulation that fall under ITRE competence. This has been a conscious choice, which I encourage all Rapporteurs and other colleagues to follow, when they analyse and propose changes to the Commission proposal. As the industry, research, energy, ICT and SME committee of the Parliament, we have a keen interest and a clear competence for many parts of the Regulation, but should also recognize the important role played by other associated committees and the lead committee.

 

The proposal includes obligations to remove illegal content from platforms, traceability of business users, ways to challenge moderation decisions, and researchers' access to data. In many parts of the Regulation, we need to strike the right balance between different legitimate interests and arguments. After carefully analysing the Commission proposal, I have found that in many of these cases, the choice made by the Commission in their proposal has been a justified and well-reasoned one. For these Articles, I am not proposing changes, even if I consider many of them to fall under ITRE competence.

 

The focus of my draft opinion is on the amount of administrative burden and requirements we are setting, not only for the big companies, but especially for the small. In the draft opinion, I have identified several requirements that due to their nature, level of detail or expected amount of compliance cost should not apply to micro and small enterprises. This, I believe, is also well in line with the input I have received from different political groups before the publication of this draft opinion.

 

In addition to the focus on micro and small enterprises, I have introduced certain clarifications and changes that are more technical in their nature. We should ensure that the standards we set in this Regulation are clear and provide businesses and consumers the required legal certainty. We should also ensure that the mechanisms we are introducing in this legislation are efficient and fulfil the role that they have been assigned.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

 

Amendment  1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services. Those diverging national laws negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice.	(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services. Those diverging national laws negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice, without lock-in effects.

Amendment  2

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and the right to non-discrimination.	(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the right to privacy, the right to protection of personal data, freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and the right to non-discrimination.

Amendment  3

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.	(4) Therefore, in order to safeguard and improve the functioning of the internal market, a targeted set of uniform, clear, 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 should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.

Amendment  4

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(5) This Regulation should apply to providers of certain information society services as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 , that is, any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient. Specifically, this Regulation should apply to providers of intermediary services, and in particular intermediary services consisting of services known as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ and ‘hosting’ services, given that the exponential growth of the use made of those services, mainly for legitimate and socially beneficial purposes of all kinds, has also increased their role in the intermediation and spread of unlawful or otherwise harmful information and activities.	(5) This Regulation should apply to providers of certain information society services as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 , that is, any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient. Specifically, this Regulation should apply to providers of intermediary services, and in particular intermediary services consisting of services known as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ and ‘hosting’ services, given that the exponential growth of the use made of those services, mainly for legitimate and socially beneficial purposes of all kinds, has also increased their responsibility for upholding fundamental rights.
__________________	__________________
26 Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).	26 Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1).

Amendment  5

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.	(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of its targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.
__________________	__________________
27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).	27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).

Amendment  6

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. However, the rules of this Regulation apply in respect of issues that are not or not fully addressed by those other acts as well as issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures at national level.	(9) This Regulation should not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended 28 , and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council 29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. In the event of a conflict between lex specialis legislation, including national implementing measures, and this Regulation, the lex specialis provisions will prevail.
__________________	__________________
28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .	28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .
29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation	29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation

Amendment  7

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.	(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, and to any provisions of national law on copyright and related rights adopted in compliance with Union law so as to ensure the highest level of protection of those rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.

Amendment  8

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood 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.	(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 as covering information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable Union or national 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, dangerous or counterfeit products, illegally-traded animals, 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. The Commission should provide guidance on how to identify illegal content.

Amendment  9

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of another service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.	(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks, content-sharing platforms, livestreaming platforms or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request, or otherwise play an active role in the dissemination of user-generated content. Search engines and equivalent services may also be considered to be online platforms, if these services meet the definition of online platform set out in this Regulation. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms, for the entirety or for part of their service, where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of the principal service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher. Similarly, link-sharing options or similar features of cloud-based solutions for storing user-generated content could constitute such a feature, where the possibility of disseminating content to the public is clearly an ancillary feature to the principal service of storing information and content.

Amendment  10

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a finite number of pre-determined persons. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information.	(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. Accordingly, where access to information requires registration or admittance to a group of users, that information should be considered to be disseminated to the public only where users seeking to access the information are automatically registered or admitted without a human decision or selection of whom to grant access. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a limited number of pre-determined persons, taking into account the potential for groups to become tools for wide dissemination of content to the public. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of the definition of online platform in this Regulation. To the extent that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or ‘hosting‘ services, those services should be able to benefit from liability exemptions provided for by this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information.
__________________	__________________
39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36	39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36.

Amendment  11

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(15a) Applying effective end-to-end encryption to data is essential for trust in, and security on, the internet, as it effectively prevents unauthorised third party access and helps to ensure the confidentiality of communications.

Amendment  12

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.	(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical, automatic and passive processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider or where the provider intermediary service promotes or references such content.

Amendment  13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) A provider of intermediary services that deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities does not provide its service neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.	(20) Where the main purpose of the information society service is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities or where a provider of intermediary services deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities, the service should be deemed not to have been provided neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.

Amendment  14

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved with the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.	(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved in the content of the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 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.	(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 assess the grounds for and, when necessary, proceed to removing or disabling access to all copies of that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its periodic own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation 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 illegal content.

Amendment  16

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.	(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online marketplaces, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average consumer.

Amendment  17

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(24) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not affect the possibility of injunctions of different kinds against providers of intermediary services, even where they meet the conditions set out as part of those exemptions. Such injunctions could, in particular, consist of orders by courts or administrative authorities requiring the termination or prevention of any infringement, including the removal of illegal content specified in such orders, issued in compliance with Union law, or the disabling of access to it.	(24) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not affect the possibility of injunctions of different kinds against providers of intermediary services, where they meet the conditions set out as part of those exemptions. Such injunctions could, in particular, consist of orders by courts or administrative authorities requiring the termination or prevention of any infringement, including the removal of illegal content specified in such orders, issued in compliance with Union law, or the disabling of access to it. As a general rule, injunctions addressed to intermediary services should be considered as a last resort, where any other reasonable and proportionate action closer to the content owner is not available.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 25

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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.	(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage automated or non-automated activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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 a diligent manner for the purpose of detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content. Such activities should be accompanied by additional safeguards. 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 or national law, including those set out in this Regulation as regards the implementation of their terms and conditions, should not lead to the unavailability of the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation. 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  19

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 26

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(26) Whilst the rules in Chapter II of this Regulation concentrate on the exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services, it is important to recall that, despite the generally important role played by those providers, the problem of illegal content and activities online should not be dealt with by solely focusing on their liability and responsibilities. Where possible, third parties affected by illegal content transmitted or stored online should attempt to resolve conflicts relating to such content without involving the providers of intermediary services in question. Recipients of the service should be held liable, where the applicable rules of Union and national law determining such liability so provide, for the illegal content that they provide and may disseminate through intermediary services. Where appropriate, other actors, such as group moderators in closed online environments, in particular in the case of large groups, should also help to avoid the spread of illegal content online, in accordance with the applicable law. Furthermore, where it is necessary to involve information society services providers, including providers of intermediary services, any requests or orders for such involvement should, as a general rule, be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, so as to prevent and minimise any possible negative effects for the availability and accessibility of information that is not illegal content.	(26) Whilst the rules in Chapter II of this Regulation concentrate on the exemption from liability of providers of intermediary services, it is important to recall that, despite the generally important role played by those providers, the problem of illegal content and activities online should not be dealt with by solely focusing on their liability and responsibilities. Where possible, third parties affected by illegal content transmitted or stored online should attempt to resolve conflicts relating to such content without involving the providers of intermediary services in question. Recipients of the service should be held liable, where the applicable rules of Union and national law determining such liability so provide, for the illegal content that they provide and may disseminate through intermediary services. Where appropriate, other actors, such as group moderators in closed online environments, in particular in the case of large groups, should also help to avoid the spread of illegal content online, in accordance with the applicable law. Furthermore, where it is necessary to involve information society services providers, including providers of intermediary services, any requests or orders for such involvement should, as a general rule, be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, so as to prevent and minimise any possible negative effects for the availability and accessibility of information that is not illegal content. Only where that intermediary has not responded to the request should requests or orders be addressed, as a last resort, to intermediaries lower in the internet stack, for removing or blocking access to content, including all the necessary information for localising as precisely as possible the illegal content.

Amendment  20

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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 that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.	(27) 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, content delivery networks or providers of services deeper in the internet stack, such as IT infrastructure services (on-premise, cloud-based and hybrid hosting solutions), that enable or improve the functions of other providers of intermediary services. 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 that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service. Services deeper in the internet stack acting as online intermediaries could be required to take proportionate action where the customer fails to remove the illegal content, unless this is  technically impracticable.

Amendment  21

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content.	(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature, nor should they be required to use automated tools for content moderation. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Such orders referred should not consist in requiring a service provider to introduce, exclusively at its own expense, a screening system which entails general and permanent monitoring in order to prevent any future infringement. However, such orders could require a host provider to remove information which it stores, the content of which is identical or equivalent to the content of information which was previously declared to be unlawful, or to block access to that information, irrespective of who requested the storage of that information, provided that the monitoring of and search for the information concerned is limited to information properly identified in the injunction, such as the name of the person concerned by the infringement determined previously, the circumstances in which that infringement was determined and equivalent content to that which was declared to be illegal, and does not require the host provider to carry out an independent assessment of that content. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation. The Regulation should not be considered to be impeding the ability of providers to undertake proactive measures to identify and remove illegal content and to prevent its reappearance.

Amendment  22

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.	(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. It should be possible for orders to act against illegal content to require providers of intermediary services to take steps, in specific cases, to remove identical or equivalent illegal content, within the same context. It should also be possible for them to require providers of intermediary services to take steps to prevent the reappearance of the illegal content. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.

Amendment  23

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity.	(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law, national law or international law and the interests of international comity.

Amendment  24

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.	(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information under either Union law or national law in compliance with Union law, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.

Amendment  25

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 34

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.	(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear, effective and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to reinforce and guarantee legislation and rights, such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.

Amendment  26

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .	(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can be used by professional entities and by users of services which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location. .

Amendment  27

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with.	(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with. Nothing in this Regulation prohibits providers of intermediary services from establishing collective representation or obtaining the services of a legal representative by other means, including contractual ones, provided that the legal representative can fulfill the role assigned to it in this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro, small or medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, and who have been unsuccessful in obtaining the services of a legal representative after reasonable effort, should be able to request that the Digital Service Coordinator of the Member State where the enterprise intends to establish a legal representative facilitates further cooperation and recommends possible solutions, including possibilities for collective representation.

Amendment  28

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.	(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place easy to access and user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notification'), pursuant to which that provider should assess the illegality of the identified content and, on the basis of that assessment, can decide whether or not it agrees with the notification of illegal content and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). In the event that provider of hosting services considers, on the basis of an assessment, that the notice of illegal content is positive and consequently decides to remove or disable access to it, it shall ensure that such content remains inaccessible after take down. Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.

Amendment  29

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 41

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.	(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content. While an absolute hierarchy between those rights does not exist, freedom of expression should be recognised as a cornerstone of a democratic society.

Amendment  30

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(42a) Providers of hosting services should not be subject to the obligation to provide a statement of reasons when doing so would cause unintended safety concerns for the recipient of the service. Specifically in cases of one-to-one interface platforms, such as dating applications and other, similar services, providing a statement of reasons should be considered as likely to cause unintended safety concerns for the reporting party. As a result of this, those services should, by default, refrain from providing statements of reasons. Additionally, other providers of hosting services should make reasonable efforts to assess whether providing a statement of reasons could cause unintended safety concerns to the reporting party and, if this is the case, should refrain from providing a statement of reasons.

Amendment  31

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(42b) The service provider should ensure that a member of staff who takes a decision based on or is otherwise frequently subjected to illegal content receives adequate training as well as appropriate working conditions, including, where necessary, the opportunity to seek professional support and qualified psychological assistance.

Amendment  32

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43a) The additional obligations imposed on online platforms under this Regulation should not apply to not-for-profit scientific or educational repositories or to online platforms offering products and services from third-party traders, which are established in the European Union, where the access of those traders is exclusive, curated and entirely controlled by the providers of the online platform and their products and services are reviewed and pre-approved by the providers of the online platform before they are offered on the platform.

Amendment  33

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43b) To avoid unnecessary regulatory burden, certain obligations should not apply to online marketplaces offering products and services from third-party traders which are established in the European Union, where the access of those traders is exclusive, curated and entirely controlled by the providers of the online marketplace and their products and services are reviewed and pre-approved by the providers of the online marketplace before they are offered on the marketplace. These online platforms are often referred to as closed online platforms. As the products and services offered are reviewed and pre-approved by the online platforms, the prevalence of illegal content and products on these platforms is low, and these platforms cannot, in most cases, benefit from relevant liability exemptions outlined in this Regulation. These online platforms should subsequently not be subjected to the obligations that are necessary for platforms with different operational models where the prevalence of illegal content is more frequent and the relevant liability exemptions are available.

Amendment  34

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 44

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost-effective manner. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.	(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise, including on freedom of expression, to carry out their activities in a fair and cost-effective manner and within a reasonable period of time. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.

Amendment  35

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 44 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(44a) If an out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, the online platform should reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient has paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform, the recipient should not be required to reimburse fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement, unless the body finds the complaint manifestly unfounded and abusive.

Amendment  36

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 46

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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	(46) Action against illegal content can be taken more quickly and reliably where online platforms, having received guidance from public authorities on how to identify illegal content, 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 and are known to flag content frequently with a high rate of accuracy, that they represent collective interests and that they work in a diligent, effective 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. For intellectual property rights, organisations of industry representing collective interests and of right-holders specifically created for that purpose could be awarded trusted flagger status, where they have demonstrated that they meet the applicable conditions, ensure independent collective interest representation and that their assessment of what constitutes an IPR infringement is unbiased and consistent. 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
_________________	_________________
43 Regulation (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	43 Regulation (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  37

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 47

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.	(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing or disseminating illegal content or by frequently submitting unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficient detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.

Amendment  38

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 49

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential information to the online platform, including for purposes of promoting messages on or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online platforms should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.	(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers and other users, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling and disseminating products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online marketplaces should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential information to the provider of the online marketplace, including for purposes of promoting messages on or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online marketplaces should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation. Occasional traders who are natural persons should not be subject to disproportionate identification requirements on online marketplaces. Providers of the online marketplaces should not ask for information from natural persons that goes beyond the mere registration of the marketplace users.

Amendment  39

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online platforms covered should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the online platforms covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online platforms, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such online platforms should also design and organise their online interface in a way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 .	(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the providers of online marketplaces should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System 45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the providers of online marketplaces should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot, as this would be disproportionate. Nor should such providers of online marketplaces, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties or be liable for this information in case it proves to be inaccurate. Providers of online marketplaces should also design and organise their online interface in a user-friendly way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 . The online interface should allow traders to provide the information allowing for the unequivocal identification of the product or the service, including labelling requirements, in accordance with legislation on product safety and product compliance.
__________________	__________________
45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en	45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en
46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council	46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)	47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)
48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers	48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers

Amendment  40

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(50a) Without prejudice to relevant exemptions for micro and small enterprises, and to strengthen the obligations of online marketplaces, further ex-ante provisions should be put in place, so as to ensure ex-ante that consumers have the necessary information for product offers, prevent unsafe and non-compliant products and product categories, strengthen ex-ante actions against product counterfeiting as well as to cooperate (ex post) where necessary with regard to dangerous products already sold. Providers of online marketplaces should inform recipients of their service when the service or product they have acquired through their services is illegal. Once they have taken a decision to remove an illegal offering from their service, the providers of online marketplaces should take measures to prevent such illegal offerings, as well as identical or equivalent offerings, from being reuploaded on their marketplace.

Amendment  41

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 51

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51) In view of the particular responsibilities and obligations of online platforms, they should be made subject to transparency reporting obligations, which apply in addition to the transparency reporting obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services under this Regulation. For the purposes of determining whether online platforms may be very large online platforms that are subject to certain additional obligations under this Regulation, the transparency reporting obligations for online platforms should include certain obligations relating to the publication and communication of information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union.	(51) In view of the particular responsibilities and obligations of online platforms, they should be made subject to transparency reporting obligations, which apply in addition to the transparency reporting obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services under this Regulation. For the purposes of determining whether online platforms may be very large online platforms that are subject to certain additional obligations under this Regulation, the transparency reporting obligations for online platforms should include certain obligations relating to the publication and communication of information on the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, in standardised formats and through standardised application programming interfaces.

Amendment  42

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 52

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.	(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising that can have an impact both on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens and on the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes and norms. New advertising models have generated changes in the way information is presented and have created new personal data collection patterns and business models that might negatively affect privacy, personal autonomy, democracy, quality news reporting and facilitate manipulation and discrimination. Therefore, more transparency in online advertising markets and independent research needs to be carried out to assess the effectiveness of behavioural advertisements. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that data collection is kept to a minimum, the maximisation of revenue from advertising does not limit the quality of the service and that the recipients of the service have extensive individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.

Amendment  43

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 52 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(52a) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.

Amendment  44

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 53

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.	(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those challenges to fundamental rights, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result. Only in very exceptional cases should users be permanently denied access to a very large online platform. The decision to permanently deny access should always be able to be revoked by a competent court.

Amendment  45

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 54

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.	(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10 % of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means. In certain cases, it should also be possible for an online platform whose number of recipients does not exceed the operational threshold set at 10 % of the Union population to be considered as a very large online platform due to its turnover, role in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and because of its influence on how recipients obtain and communicate information online.

Amendment  46

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 56

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures.	(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they were able to set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures to address, in particular, filtering bubbles and effects.

Amendment  47

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 57

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.	(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products and illegally-traded animals. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.

Amendment  48

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 60

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.	(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent external auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. As an indication of independence, at the time of the performance of the audit, auditors should not have provided services, other than auditing services, to the very large online platform over the course of the previous 12 months. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.

Amendment  49

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 61

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken.	(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation, without prejudice to the fact that the platform remains solely responsible for its compliance with this Regulation and without prejudice to its freedom to conduct a business and, in particular, its ability to design and implement effective measures that are aligned with its specific business model. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken. A disclaimer should be added to an opinion where the auditor does not have enough information to conclude its opinion due to the novelty of the issues being audited.

Amendment  50

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 62

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient.	(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed on the use of recommender systems, and that recipients can easily control the way information is presented to them. They should clearly and separately present the main parameters for such recommender systems in a clear, concise, accessible and easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient. Very large online platforms should ensure that their online interface is designed in such a way that it does not risk misleading or manipulating the recipients of the service.

Amendment  51

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 63

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.	deleted

Amendment  52

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 63 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(63a) By associating advertisements with content uploaded by users, very large online platform could indirectly lead to the promotion of illegal content, or content that is in breach of their terms and conditions  and could risk to considerably damage to the buyers of advertising space. In order to prevent such practice, very large online platforms should take steps, including through contractual guarantees to the purchasers of advertising space, to ensure that the content to which they associate advertisements is legal and compliant with their terms and conditions. These steps could include independent audits entailing a quantitative and qualitative assessment of cases where advertising is associated with illegal content or with content incompatible with platforms’ terms and conditions.

Amendment  53

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 63 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(63b) Very large online platforms should use their best efforts not to permit behavioural and micro-targeted advertising towards children under the age of 18, in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation.

Amendment  54

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 64

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.	(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific information or data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling very large online platforms to provide information and access to data to vetted researchers. All requirements for providing information and for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service. Research conducted under this regime should, where possible, be conducted on the basis of open access principles and should use standardised data sets to ensure a high level of transparency and accountability as regards the use of provided data.

Amendment  55

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 65 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(65a) Interoperability with very large online platforms is desirable as it can create new opportunities for the development of innovative services, overcome the lock-in effect and ensure competition and user choice. These possibilities could allow recipients to benefit from cross-platform interaction. Very large online platforms may provide an application programming interface through which third-party platforms and their recipients can interoperate with the main functionalities and recipients of the core services offered by the platform. The main functions could include the ability to receive information from certain accounts, to share provided content and react to it. Additionally, very large online platforms could make the core functionalities of their services interoperable with other online platforms to enable cross-platform communication. This possibility should not limit, hinder or delay the very large online platform’s ability to solve security issues and should be in compliance with all their responsibilities, especially regarding fundamental rights and protection of privacy. The Commission should request European standardisation bodies to develop the necessary technical standards for interoperability, such as protocol on interoperability and data interoperability and portability.

Amendment  56

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 65 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(65b) Very large online platforms should ensure the portability of reviews to the reputation system of another platform operator upon the termination of the platform-user contract. For the sake of transparency, information about the processes, technical requirements, timeframes and charges that apply in case a platform user wishes to transfer reviews to the reputation system of another platform operator should be provided beforehand. When displaying reviews imported from another platform, the receiving platform operator should indicate the origin of such reviews, where possible.

Amendment  57

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 68

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.	(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.

Amendment  58

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 70

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.	(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives. The codes should contain clear and precise consumer protection and human rights objectives and be governed in a transparent manner. The effectiveness of the codes of conduct should be regularly assessed.

Amendment  59

 

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 97

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(97) The Commission should remain free to decide whether or not it wishes to intervene in any of the situations where it is empowered to do so under this Regulation. Once the Commission initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necessary.	(97) The Commission should remain free to decide whether or not it wishes to intervene in any of the situations where it is empowered to do so under this Regulation. However, it should justify any inaction. Once the Commission initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necessary.

Amendment  60

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) interoperability requirements for very large online platforms.

Amendment  61

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market for intermediary services;	(a) contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market for digital services, including by creating a level playing-field;

Amendment  62

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.	(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected;

Amendment  63

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) facilitate innovation, support the digital transition, encourage economic growth and encourage competition for digital services, while protecting users’ and consumers’ rights.

Amendment  64

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ia) Directive (EU) 2019/882;

Amendment  65

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union; such a substantial connection is deemed to exist where the provider has an establishment in the Union; in the absence of such an establishment, the assessment of a substantial connection is based on specific factual criteria, such as:	(d) ‘to offer services in the Union’ means enabling legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use the services of the provider of information society services which has a substantial connection to the Union; such a substantial connection is deemed to exist where the provider has an establishment in the Union or in the absence of such an establishment, where the provider targets its activities towards one or more Member States.

Amendment  66

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— a significant number of users in one or more Member States; or	deleted

Amendment  67

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States.	deleted

Amendment  68

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 another service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that other service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.	(h) ‘online platform’ means a provider of a hosting service which applies specific terms and conditions and, 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 the principal service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that principal service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.

Amendment  69

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ha) ‘online marketplace’ means an online platform that allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with other traders or consumers on the platform;

Amendment  70

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point l

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(l) ‘Digital Services Coordinator of establishment’ means the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the provider of an intermediary service is established or its legal representative resides or is established;	(l) ‘Digital Services Coordinator of establishment’ means the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the provider of an intermediary service has its main establishment or, in the case that the intermediary service is not established in the European Union, where  its legal representative is established;

Amendment  71

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed to promote the message of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether to achieve commercial or non-commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface against remuneration specifically for promoting that information;	(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed to promote the message of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether to achieve commercial or non-commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface against indirect and direct forms of remuneration specifically for promoting that information;

Amendment  72

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system used by an online platform to suggest in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;	(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system used by an online platform to rank, prioritise and suggest in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;

Amendment  73

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, the service provider shall not be liable for the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients of the service upon their request, on condition that:	1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, the service provider shall not be liable for the automatic, intermediate and temporary storage of that information, performed for the sole purpose of making more efficient the information's onward transmission to other recipients of the service upon their request, on condition that the provider:

Amendment  74

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the provider does not modify the information;	(a) does not modify the information;

Amendment  75

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the provider complies with conditions on access to the information;	(b) complies with conditions on access to the information;

Amendment  76

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the provider complies with rules regarding the updating of the information, specified in a manner widely recognised and used by industry;	(c) complies with rules regarding the updating of the information, specified in a manner widely recognised and used by industry;

Amendment  77

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the provider does not interfere with the lawful use of technology, widely recognised and used by industry, to obtain data on the use of the information; and	(d) does not interfere with the lawful use of technology, widely recognised and used by industry, to obtain data on the use of the information; and

Amendment  78

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the provider acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the information it has stored upon obtaining actual knowledge of the fact that the information at the initial source of the transmission has been removed from the network, or access to it has been disabled, or that a court or an administrative authority has ordered such removal or disablement.	(e) acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the information it has stored upon obtaining actual knowledge of the fact that the illegal content at the initial source of the transmission has been removed from the network, or access to it has been disabled, or that a court or an administrative authority has ordered such removal or disablement.

Amendment  79

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply when the main purpose of the information society service is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities or when the provider of the information society service deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the service in order to undertake illegal activities.

Amendment  80

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe 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.	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 on the platform, where such an online platform presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe 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.

Amendment  81

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation.	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 take voluntary own-initiative investigation measures for the purpose of detecting, identifying and removing, or disabling access to, illegal content, including through the use of technological tools and instruments, in order to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation.

Amendment  82

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that voluntary investigations are accompanied by appropriate safeguards, including, where necessary, human oversight, to ensure they are transparent, fair and non-discriminatory.

Amendment  83

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
— information about redress available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content;	— information about redress mechanisms available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content;

Amendment  84

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) compliance with the measures in the order is technically feasible taking into account the available technical capabilities of the service provider concerned.

Amendment  85

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The orders to act against illegal content may require providers of intermediary services to take steps, in the specific case, to remove identical or equivalent illegal content.

Amendment  86

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. Any requests to providers of intermediary services, made on the basis of this legislation, shall be transmitted through the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State of establishment, who is responsible for collecting requests and communication from all relevant sources.

Amendment  87

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. Providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro, small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, and who have been unsuccessful in obtaining the services of a legal representative after reasonable effort, shall be able to request that the Digital Service Coordinator of the Member State where the enterprise intends to establish a legal representative facilitates further cooperation and recommends possible solutions, including possibilities for collective representation.

Amendment  88

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on the activities undertaken by them and any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.

Amendment  89

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a diligent, objective and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a transparent, non-discriminatory, coherent, predictable, diligent, non-arbitrary, necessary and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the terms and conditions referred to in paragraph 1, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.

Amendment  90

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Those parts of the terms and conditions that do not comply with this Article shall not be binding on recipients of the services. Providers of intermediary services shall inform recipients of their services of all changes in terms and conditions in advance.

Amendment  91

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. Where very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of this Regulation allow for the dissemination to the public of press publications within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, such platforms shall not remove, disable access to, suspend or otherwise interfere with such content or the related service or suspend or terminate the related account on the basis of the alleged incompatibility of such content with its terms and conditions.

Amendment  92

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. Any restrictions that providers of intermediary services impose in relation to the use of their service and the information provided by the recipients of the service shall be in full compliance with the fundamental rights of the recipients of the services as enshrined in the Charter.

Amendment  93

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:	1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. Where possible, the information published shall be broken down per Member State in which services are offered. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:

Amendment  94

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed for taking the action specified in those orders;	(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised, where possible, by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9;

Amendment  95

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action;	(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, the number of notices submitted by trusted flaggers, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider;

Amendment  96

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the content moderation engaged in at the providers’ own initiative, including the number and type of measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of information provided by the recipients of the service and the recipients’ ability to provide information, categorised by the type of reason and basis for taking those measures;	(c) the content moderation engaged in at the providers’ own initiative, including the number and type of measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of information provided by the recipients of the service, as well as measures taken to train content moderators and the safeguards put in place to ensure that non-infringing content is not affected;

Amendment  97

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.	(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, where identifiable, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints and the number of instances where content moderation decisions were reversed.

Amendment  98

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user-friendly, and allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means.	1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user-friendly, and allow for the submission of notices at scale and exclusively by electronic means. Those mechanisms may not replace a decision of an independent judicial and administrative authority as to whether content is illegal or not.

Amendment  99

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:	2. The notifications referred to in paragraph 1 shall be sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify and assess the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:

Amendment  100

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;	(b) a clear indication of the electronic identification of that information, such as the URL or URLs where possible, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;

Amendment  101

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) a statement confirming the good faith belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are accurate and complete.	(d) a statement confirming the good faith belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are, to the best of their knowledge, accurate and complete.

Amendment  102

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.	3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and that are thus sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated, and on the basis of which a diligent provider of hosting services can identify the illegality of the specific content, shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.

Amendment  103

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Where the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, the provider of hosting services shall promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity.	4. Where the notification contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, the provider of hosting services shall promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notification to that individual or entity.

Amendment  104

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity of its decision in respect of the information to which the notice relates, providing information on the redress possibilities in respect of that decision.	5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity and the content provider of its decision in respect of the information to which the notification relates, providing information on the redress possibilities in respect of that decision.

Amendment  105

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.	6. Providers of hosting services shall, where the information provided is sufficiently clear, act on any notifications that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, taking into account their technical and operational ability to act against specific items of illegal content, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notifications relate, in a timely, diligent and non-arbitrary manner. Where they use automated means for that processing, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.

Amendment  106

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6a. Paragraphs 4 and 5 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In addition, paragraphs 4 and 5 shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a micro or small enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status pursuant to Article 4(2) thereof.

Amendment  107

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove or disable access to specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing or disabling access to that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.	1. Where a provider of hosting services decides or not to remove or disable access to, or otherwise moderate either the form or distribution of, specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing or disabling access to that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient without undue delay and at the latest within 24 hours after such removal or disabling of access or other content moderation and content curation measure, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.

Amendment  108

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access;	(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the information and the territorial scope of the disabling of access;

Amendment  109

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) where applicable, information on the use made of automated means in taking the decision, including where the decision was taken in respect of content detected or identified using automated means;	(c) where applicable, information on the means used in taking the decision;

Amendment  110

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Providers of hosting services shall publish the decisions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible database managed by the Commission. That information shall not contain personal data.	deleted

Amendment  111

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Providers of hosting services shall not be obliged to provide a statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 where the statement of reasons could give rise to unintended safety concerns for the reporting party. In addition, providers of hosting services shall not be obliged to provide a statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 where the provider can demonstrate that the recipient of the service has repeatedly provided illegal content.

Amendment  112

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. Paragraphs 2 and 3 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In addition, those paragraphs shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a micro or small enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status pursuant to Article 4(2) thereof.

Amendment  113

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15a
	Protection against repeated misuse and criminal offences
	1.  Providers of intermediary services shall, after having issued a prior warning, suspend or, in appropriate circumstances, terminate the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide illegal content after having provided a comprehensive explanation,
	2.  Where a provider of intermediary services becomes aware of any information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or is likely to take place, it shall promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide all relevant information available. Where the provider of intermediary services cannot identify with reasonable certainty the Member State concerned, it shall inform the law enforcement authorities of the Member State in which it has its main establishment or legal representative, and shall also transmit this information to Europol for appropriate follow-up.

Amendment  114

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15b
	Market entrance protection
	The provisions in this Section shall not be enforced against micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC for a period of one year after their establishment. During this period, such enterprises shall make all reasonable efforts to comply with the provisions in this section and shall act in good faith.

Amendment  115

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.	This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, unless they meet the criteria to qualify as very large online platforms under this Regulation. This Section shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a micro or small enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status pursuant to Article 4(2) thereof, unless they meet the criteria to qualify as very large online platforms under this Regulation.

Amendment  116

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall provide 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, 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:	1. Online platforms shall provide recipients of the service and qualified entities within the meaning of Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2020/1828, 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, 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  117

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) decisions to remove or disable access to the information;	(a) decisions to remove, disable, demote, demonetise or restrict access to the information or otherwise impose sanctions against it;

Amendment  118

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints.	2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendly, and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints and include human review.

Amendment  119

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.	3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and non-arbitrary manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay. If the complaining entity so requests, the online platform shall publicly confirm the reversal of the decision.

Amendment  120

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Online platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities.	4. Online platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities. Such delay shall not exceed three weeks from the lodging of the complaint.

Amendment  121

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.	After internal complaint handling mechanisms are exhausted, recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1) and qualified entities within the meaning of Article 3(4) of Directive (EU) 2020/1828 shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2  in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected by the recipient with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.

Amendment  122

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) it has the necessary expertise in relation to the issues arising in one or more particular areas of illegal content, or in relation to the application and enforcement of terms and conditions of one or more types of online platforms, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute;	(b) it has the necessary legal expertise in relation to the issues arising in one or more particular areas of illegal content, or in relation to the application and enforcement of terms and conditions of one or more types of online platforms, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute;

Amendment  123

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible through electronic communication technology;	(c) it offers dispute settlement that is easily accessible through electronic communication technology;

Amendment  124

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;	(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient, transparent and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;

Amendment  125

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure.	(e) it offers dispute settlement that takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure and sufficient confidentiality safeguards.

Amendment  126

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) where applicable, it has particular legal expertise in relation to the applicable laws relating to freedom of expression and its limitations and the applicable case law, including the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

Amendment  127

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
If the body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, the online platform shall reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient has paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform, the recipient shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement.	If the body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, the online platform shall reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient has paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform the recipient shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement, unless the body finds that the complaint is manifestly unfounded and abusive.

Amendment  128

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. This Article is without prejudice to Directive 2013/11/EU and alternative dispute resolution procedures and entities for consumers established under that Directive.	6. This Article is without prejudice to Directive 2013/11/EU and alternative dispute resolution procedures and entities for consumers established under that Directive. Any attempt to reach an out-of-court agreement on the settlement of a dispute in accordance with this Article shall not affect the rights of the providers of online platform services and of the recipients of the service concerned to initiate judicial proceedings at any time before, during or after the out-of-court dispute settlement process.

Amendment  129

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay.	1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay. Similar priority may be given to other notices, when the trustworthiness of those submitting them and the severity and urgency of the situations concerned is considered to be exceptional.

Amendment  130

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) it has particular expertise and competence for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content;	(a) it has demonstrated particular expertise, accuracy and expertise for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content;

Amendment  131

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner.	(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in an objective manner.

Amendment  132

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) where applicable, it has particular legal expertise in relation to the applicable laws relating to freedom of expression and its limitations and the applicable case law, including the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

Amendment  133

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State may award the status of trusted flagger to an entity established in another Member State, if the said entity already holds the status of a trusted flagger in the Member State where it is established. Where several Member States have awarded such status to the same entity, the entity may be referred to as a European trusted flagger.

Amendment  134

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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.	3. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment of the platform shall engage in dialogue with platforms and stakeholders for maintaining the accuracy and efficacy of a trusted flagger system.

Amendment  135

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.	5. Where an online platform has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated notices or notices regarding legal content 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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.

Amendment  136

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7a. Online platforms shall, where possible, provide trusted flaggers with access to technical means that help them detect illegal content on a large scale.

Amendment  137

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content.	1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time, or in appropriate circumstances terminate, and after having issued a prior warning and having provided a comprehensive explanation, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content. A termination of the service can be issued in case the recipients fail to comply with the applicable provisions set out in this Regulation or in case the suspension has occurred at least three times following verification of the repeated provision of illegal content.

Amendment  138

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequently submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded.	2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequently submit notices or complaints that are unfounded.

Amendment  139

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the absolute numbers of items of manifestly illegal content or manifestly unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;	(a) the absolute numbers of items of illegal content or unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;

Amendment  140

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant.	(d) where identifiable, the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant.

Amendment  141

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.	4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension, and the circumstances in which they will terminate their services.

Amendment  142

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 Europol.	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 has its main establishment or legal representative and also transmit this information to Europol for appropriate follow-up.

Amendment  143

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtained the following information:	1. Providers of online marketplaces shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of their services, online marketplaces have  obtained the following information from the trader:

Amendment  144

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the bank account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;	deleted

Amendment  145

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning of Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council51 or any relevant act of Union law;	(d) to the extent the contract relates to products that are subject to the Union Regulations listed in Article 4(5) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council, the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, established in the Union, referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council 51 or any relevant act of Union law;
__________________	__________________
51 Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).	51 Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).

Amendment  146

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The online platform shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonable efforts to assess whether the information referred to in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 is reliable through the use of any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by a Member States or the Union or through requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.	2. The provider of the online marketplace shall, upon receiving that information, take effective steps that would reasonably be taken by a diligent operator in accordance with a high industry standard of professional diligence to assess whether the information referred to in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 is accurate, current and reliable through the use of independent and reliable sources including any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by an authorised administrator, Member States or the Union or through requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.

Amendment  147

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the online platform obtains indications that any item of information referred to in paragraph 1 obtained from the trader concerned is inaccurate or incomplete, that platform shall request the trader to correct the information in so far as necessary to ensure that all information is accurate and complete, without delay or within the time period set by Union and national law.	Where the provider of the online marketplace obtains indications that any item of information referred to in paragraph 1 obtained from the trader concerned is inaccurate or incomplete, that marketplace shall request the trader to correct the information in so far as necessary to ensure that all information is accurate and complete, without delay or within the time period set by Union and national law.

Amendment  148

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Where the trader fails to correct or complete that information, the online platform shall suspend the provision of its service to the trader until the request is complied with.	deleted

Amendment  149

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The provider of online marketplace shall require that traders promptly inform them of any changes to the information referred to in paragraph 1 and, in such cases, repeat the relevant steps referred to in paragraph 2. Where the provider of the online marketplace obtains indication that an item of information referred to in Article 22 is inaccurate, the provider of the online marketplace shall request the trader to provide evidence of the accuracy of that item of information or to correct it without delay. Where the trader fails to provide evidence of accuracy, correct or complete that information, the online platform shall suspend the provision of its service to the trader until the request is complied with.

Amendment  150

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The online platform shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently delete the information.	4. The provider of the online marketplace shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned including the period for redress. They shall subsequently delete the information.

Amendment  151

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Without prejudice to paragraph 2, the platform shall only disclose the information to third parties where so required in accordance with the applicable law, including the orders referred to in Article 9 and any orders issued by Member States’ competent authorities or the Commission for the performance of their tasks under this Regulation.	5. Without prejudice to paragraph 2, the provider of the online marketplace shall only disclose the information to third parties where so required in accordance with the applicable law, including the orders referred to in Article 9 and any orders issued by Member States’ competent authorities or the Commission for the performance of their tasks under this Regulation.

Amendment  152

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. The online platform shall make the information referred to in points (a), (d), (e) and (f) of paragraph 1 available to the recipients of the service, in a clear, easily accessible and comprehensible manner.	6. The provider of the online marketplace shall make the information referred to in points (a), (d), (e) and (f) of paragraph 1 available to the recipients of the service, in a clear, easily accessible and comprehensible manner.

Amendment  153

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
7. The online platform shall design and organise its online interface in a way that enables traders to comply with their obligations regarding pre-contractual information and product safety information under applicable Union law.	7. The provider of the online marketplace shall design and organise its online interface in a fair and user-friendly way that enables traders to comply with their obligations regarding pre-contractual information and product safety information under applicable Union law.

Amendment  154

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7a. The provider of the online marketplace shall design its service in a way that allows traders to communicate to their customers all relevant information for the identification of the product or the service, and, where applicable, the information concerning labelling, including CE marking.

Amendment  155

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 7 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7b. Online platforms shall ensure that traders are approved without undue delay once the online platform has received the information referred to in paragraph 1 and taken the steps referred to in paragraph 2.

Amendment  156

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 22a
	Additional provisions for online marketplaces related to illegal offers
	1. Where a provider of the online marketplace becomes aware of the illegal nature of a product or service offered through its services, it shall inform those recipients of the service that had acquired such product or contracted such service.
	2.  The provider of the online marketplace shall suspend without undue delay the provision of its services to traders that provide, in a repeated manner, illegal offers for a product or a service. It shall immediately notify its decision to the trader.
	3.  For products, categories or groups of products, which are susceptible to bear a serious risk to health and safety of consumers, based on accidents registered in the Safety Business Gateway, the Safety Gate statistics, the results of the joint activities on product safety and other relevant indicators or evidence, as outlined in the Regulation (EU) […/…] on general product safety, amending Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 and repealing Directive 87/357/EEC and Directive 2001/95/EC, the provider of the online marketplace shall verify, with regard to the information referred to in paragraph 7a of Article 22, and before the trader's offer is made available on the online marketplace, if the offer that the trader wishes to propose to consumers located in the Union is mentioned in the list, or the lists, of products or categories of products identifies as non-compliant, as classified in any freely accessible official online database or online interface, and shall not authorise the trade to provide the offer if that the product is on such list.
	4.  The provider of the online marketplace shall ensure that content identified as illegal remain inaccessible after take down, and take steps, in the specific case, to remove identical or equivalent illegal content.

Amendment  157

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of manifestly illegal content, the submission of manifestly unfounded notices and the submission of manifestly unfounded complaints;	(b) the number of suspensions imposed pursuant to Article 20, distinguishing between suspensions enacted for the provision of illegal content, the submission of unfounded notices and the submission of unfounded complaints;

Amendment  158

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Online advertising transparency	Online advertising transparency requirements

Amendment  159

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear and unambiguous manner and in real time:	1. Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear, meaningful and unambiguous manner and at all times:

Amendment  160

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) that the information displayed is an advertisement;	(a) that the information displayed or parts thereof is an advertisement;

Amendment  161

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement, if different from the natural or legal person identified pursuant to point (b);

Amendment  162

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) meaningful information about the main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed.	(c) clear, meaningful information about the main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed, and how to change those parameters;

Amendment  163

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) whether the advertisement was selected using an automated system and, in that case, the identity of the natural or legal person responsible for the system.

Amendment  164

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Online platforms shall offer users the possibility to easily opt-out from micro-targeted tracking and advertisements that are based on their behaviour data or other profiling techniques, within the meaning of Article 4(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Amendment  165

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3.	1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3, or where the platform has been designated as a very large online platform in accordance with paragraph 4a.

Amendment  166

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific methodology for calculating the number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, for the purposes of paragraph 1. The methodology shall specify, in particular, how to determine the Union’s population and criteria to determine the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, taking into account different accessibility features.	3. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific methodology for calculating the number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union and whether the turnover, operating model and nature of platform constitutes a systemic risk, for the purposes of paragraph 1. The methodology shall specify, in particular, how to determine the Union’s population and criteria to determine the average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union, taking into account different accessibility features, as well as how to determine whether the turnover, operating model and size of platform constitutes a systemic risk.

Amendment  167

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Commission shall ensure that the list of designated very large online platforms is published in the Official Journal of the European Union and keep that list updated. The obligations of this Section shall apply, or cease to apply, to the very large online platforms concerned from four months after that publication.	deleted

Amendment  168

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69 to designate online platforms, which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union lower than 45 million but pose a very high systemic risk, as very large online platforms. The assessment of a systemic risk shall be based on the following criteria:
	(a)  the annual turnover of the online platform, with EUR 50 million as a threshold that shall be exceeded for an online platform to qualify for further assessment based on points b) to e).
	(b) the role of the online platform as a public forum;
	(c) the role, nature and volume of economic transactions on the online platform;
	(d) the role of the online platform in disseminating information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients of the service obtain and communicate information online; and
	(e) the depth and scope of the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of the services of the online platform, as defined in Article 26, as well as the historical prevalence of illegal content on the service.

Amendment  169

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. The Commission shall ensure that the list of designated very large online platforms is published in the Official Journal of the European Union and keep that list updated. The obligations of this Section shall apply, or cease to apply, to the very large online platforms concerned from four months after that publication.

Amendment  170

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks:	1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. The risk assessment shall be broken down per Member State in which services are offered and in the Union as a whole. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks:

Amendment  171

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively;	(b) any negative effects for the exercise of fundamental rights, including the rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom and pluralism of the media, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter, as well as any other fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter that can be negatively affected by such risks now or in the future;

Amendment  172

Proposal for a regulation

Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security.	(c) intentional manipulation of their servicewith actual or foreseeable systemic negative effects on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security, including the risk of manipulation of their service by means of inauthentic use, deep fakes or automated exploitation of the service.

Amendment  173

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:	1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective measures to cease, prevent and mitigate the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:

Amendment  174

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(aa) ensuring appropriate staffing to deal with notices and complaints;

Amendment  175

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) initiating or adjusting cooperation with trusted flaggers in accordance with Article 19;	(d) adjusting cooperation with trusted flaggers in accordance with Article 19;

Amendment  176

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) best practices for very large online platforms to mitigate the systemic risks identified.	(b) best practices for very large online platforms to cease, prevent and mitigate the systemic risks identified.

Amendment  177

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue general guidelines on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific risks, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those guidelines the Commission shall organise public consultations.	3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue general recommendations on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific risks, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those recommendations the Commission shall organise public consultations.

Amendment  178

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 27 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. The reports referred to in paragraph 2 shall be disseminated to the public and include standardised, open data describing the systemic risks, especially risks to fundamental rights.

Amendment  179

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to audits to assess compliance with the following:	1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to independent audits to assess compliance with the following:

Amendment  180

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by organisations which:	2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by organisations or associations which have been constituted in accordance with the law of a Member State and which:

Amendment  181

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) are independent from the very large online platform concerned;	(a) are independent from the very large online platform concerned and have not provided any service other than audits or relevant ancillary services to that platform in the previous 12 months;

Amendment  182

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) have not audited the very large online platform concerned for more than three consecutive years.

Amendment  183

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) where the audit opinion is not positive, operational recommendations on specific measures to achieve compliance.	(f) where the audit opinion is negative, 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  184

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) where the organisation that performs the audit does not have enough information to conclude the audit opinion due to the novelty of the issues audited, a relevant disclaimer.

Amendment  185

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Very large online platforms receiving an audit report that is not positive shall take due account of any operational recommendations addressed to them with a view to take the necessary measures to implement them. They shall, within one month from receiving those recommendations, adopt an audit implementation report setting out those measures. Where they do not implement the operational recommendations, they shall justify in the audit implementation report the reasons for not doing so and set out any alternative measures they may have taken to address any instances of non-compliance identified.	4. Very large online platforms receiving an audit report that contains evidence that the platform is not properly assessing or mitigating systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union shall take due account of any operational recommendations addressed to them with a view to take the necessary measures to implement them. They shall, within one month from receiving those recommendations, adopt an audit implementation report setting out those measures. Where they do not implement the operational recommendations, they shall justify in the audit implementation report the reasons for not doing so and set out any alternative measures they may have taken to address any instances of non-compliance identified.

Amendment  186

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Digital Services Coordinators shall provide very large online platforms under their jurisdiction with an annual audit plan outlining the key areas of focus for the upcoming audit cycle.

Amendment  187

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 28 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. The audits shall be submitted to Digital Services Coordinators, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and to the Commission. Summary of audit findings, not including sensitive information, shall be made public. Digital Services Coordinators, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and the Commission may provide a public comment on the audits.

Amendment  188

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.	1. Very large online platforms shall not make the recipients of their services subject to recommender system based on profiling, unless the recipient of the service has expressed a freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous consent. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main technical parameters used in their recommender systems,  and they shall provide options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main technical parameters that they shall make available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and, where possible, keep a log of the significant changes implemented to the recommender system.

Amendment  189

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, very large online platforms shall provide an easily accessible functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them.	2. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, very large online platforms shall provide an easily accessible and user-friendly functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them

Amendment  190

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The parameters referred to in paragraph 1 shall include:
	(a)  whether the recommender system is an automated system and, in that case, the identity of the natural or legal person responsible for the recommender system, if different from the platform provider;
	(b)  clear information about the main criteria used by recommender systems;
	(c)  where possible, the relevance and weight of each main criteria which leads to the information recommended;
	(d)  the goals the system has been optimised for,
	(e)  if applicable, an explanation of the role that the behaviour of the recipients of the service plays in how the relevant system produces its outputs.

Amendment  191

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 29a
	Portability of data and reviews
	1.  Very large online platforms shall provide effective portability of data generated through the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools for end users to facilitate the exercise of data portability, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access;
	2.  Very large online platforms shall ensure the portability of reviews to the reputation system of another platform operator upon the termination of the platform-user contract.

Amendment  192

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement, if different from the natural or legal person identified pursuant to point (b);

Amendment  193

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the total number of recipients of the service reached and, where applicable, aggregate numbers for the group or groups of recipients to whom the advertisement was targeted specifically.	(e) the total number of recipients of the service reached and, where applicable, aggregate numbers for the group or groups of recipients to whom the advertisement was targeted specifically, and whether other groups have been explicitly excluded.

Amendment  194

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, specified in the request, access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only use that data for those purposes.	1. Very large online platforms shall provide the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, upon their reasoned request and within a reasonable period, specified in the request, information and access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation. That Digital Services Coordinator and the Commission shall only use that data for those purposes.

Amendment  195

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1).	2. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide information and access to data to vetted researchers, not-for-profit bodies, organisations or associations which have been constituted in accordance with the law of a Member State, who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of facilitating and conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in Article 26(1) and to enable verification of the effectiveness and proportionality of the mitigation measures as set out in Article 27(1).

Amendment  196

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate.	3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate. The period for which information and data is to be provided pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be specified in the request. The data provided to vetted researchers shall be as disaggregated as possible, unless the researcher requests it otherwise.

Amendment  197

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. In order to be vetted, researchers shall be affiliated with academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests, have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.	4. In order to be vetted, researchers shall be affiliated with academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests, disclose the funding financing the research, have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.

Amendment  198

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	7a. Upon completion of their research, the vetted researchers that have been granted access to data shall publish their findings without disclosing personal data.

Amendment  199

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) relevant information on content moderation broken down per Member State in which the services are offered and in the Union as a whole.

Amendment  200

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Where a very large online platform considers that the publication of information pursuant to paragraph 2 may result in the disclosure of confidential information of that platform or of the recipients of the service, may cause significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service, may undermine public security or may harm recipients, the platform may remove such information from the reports. In that case, that platform shall transmit the complete reports to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Commission, accompanied by a statement of the reasons for removing the information from the public reports.	3. Where a very large online platform considers that the publication of information pursuant to paragraph 2 may result in the disclosure of confidential information of that platform or of the recipients of the service, may cause significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service, may undermine public security or may harm recipients, the platform may remove such information from the reports. In that case, that platform shall transmit the complete reports to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Commission, accompanied by a statement of the reasons for removing the information from the public reports. In such cases, the platform shall indicate that information was removed from the report, the scope of the information removed and the reason for the removal.

Amendment  201

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) the different types of data that can be used.

Amendment  202

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The Commission shall be responsible for the drafting and scrutiny of the crisis protocols referred to in paragraph 1. It shall report annually thereon to the European Parliament.

Amendment  203

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The competent authorities referred to in the first subparagraph shall have relevant expertise in the field of data protection, consumer protection or the regulation of user-generated content.

Amendment  204

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Supervisory authorities designated under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall be tasked with the application and enforcement of measures related to data processing set out in this Regulation.

Amendment  205

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Member States shall designate one of the competent authorities as their Digital Services Coordinator. The Digital Services Coordinator shall be responsible for all matters relating to application and enforcement of this Regulation in that Member State, unless the Member State concerned has assigned certain specific tasks or sectors to other competent authorities. The Digital Services Coordinator shall in any event be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of those matters and for contributing to the effective and consistent application and enforcement of this Regulation throughout the Union.	Member States shall designate one of the competent authorities as their Digital Services Coordinator. The Digital Services Coordinator shall be responsible for the application and enforcement of this Regulation in that Member State, unless the Member State concerned has assigned certain specific tasks or sectors to other competent authorities. The Digital Services Coordinator shall in any event be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of matters related to this Regulation and for contributing to the effective and consistent application and enforcement of this Regulation throughout the Union.

Amendment  206

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For that purpose, Digital Services Coordinators shall cooperate with each other, other national competent authorities, the Board and the Commission, without prejudice to the possibility for Member States to provide for regular exchanges of views with other authorities where relevant for the performance of the tasks of those other authorities and of the Digital Services Coordinator.	For that purpose, Digital Services Coordinators shall cooperate with each other, other national competent authorities, the Board and the Commission, without prejudice to the possibility for Member States to provide for regular exchanges of views with other authorities where relevant for the performance of the tasks of those other authorities and of the Digital Services Coordinator, including sharing information on cross-border cases and providing support for each other during ongoing interventions and investigations.

Amendment  207

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The Board shall create a publicly accessible list of all Digital Services Coordinators and competent authorities. It shall regularly update and monitor this list.

Amendment  208

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The Commission shall provide guidance to Member States to ensure a consistent approach on how national, local and regional authorities should relate to their Digital Services Coordinator.

Amendment  209

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 38 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The Commission shall publish and update a register containing the name and contact information of the Digital Service Coordinator responsible in each Member State.

Amendment  210

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators perform their tasks under this Regulation in an impartial, transparent and timely manner. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators have adequate technical, financial and human resources to carry out their tasks.	1. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators perform their tasks under this Regulation in an impartial, independent, transparent and timely manner. Member States shall ensure that their Digital Services Coordinators have all necessary technical, financial and human resources, including skills and competence building, as well as infrastructure to carry out their tasks. Such resources may include access to training and regular exchanges with service providers to understand the specificities of their business model.

Amendment  211

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. When carrying out their tasks and exercising their powers in accordance with this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinators shall act with complete independence. They shall remain free from any external influence, whether direct or indirect, and shall neither seek nor take instructions from any other public authority or any private party.	2. When carrying out their tasks and exercising their powers in accordance with this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinators shall act with complete independence. They shall remain free from any external influence, whether direct or indirect, and shall not take instructions from any other public authority or any private party.

Amendment  212

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Digital Services Coordinators may seek information from a public authority or private party if it deems it necessary to carry out its duties, without compromising its independence and neutrality.

Amendment  213

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 41 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. Member States shall ensure that any exercise of the powers pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 is subject to adequate safeguards laid down in the applicable national law in conformity with the Charter and with the general principles of Union law. In particular, those measures shall only be taken in accordance with the right to respect for private life and the rights of defence, including the rights to be heard and of access to the file, and subject to the right to an effective judicial remedy of all affected parties.	6. Member States shall ensure that any exercise of the powers pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 is subject to the highest safeguards laid down in the applicable national law, in absolute conformity with the Charter and with the general principles of Union law. In particular, those measures shall only be taken in accordance with the right to respect for private life and the rights of defence, including the rights to be heard and of access to the file, and subject to the right to an effective judicial remedy of all affected parties.

Amendment  214

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual income or turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information and to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1% of the annual income or turnover of the provider concerned.	3. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual income or global turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information and to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1 % of the annual income or global turnover of the provider concerned.

Amendment  215

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 42 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.	4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily global turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.

Amendment  216

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 43 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Recipients of the service shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority.	Recipients of the service, as well as other parties with a legitimate interest and who are independent of any provider of intermediary service, shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority.

Amendment  217

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) issue own-initiative opinions.

Amendment  218

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. In the decision pursuant to Article 58, the Commission may impose on the very large online platform concerned fines not exceeding 6% of its total turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that that platform, intentionally or negligently:	1. In the decision pursuant to Article 58, the Commission may impose on the very large online platform concerned fines not exceeding 6 % of its total global turnover in the preceding financial year where it finds that that platform, intentionally or negligently:

Amendment  219

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Commission may by decision impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1% of the total turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:	2. The Commission may by decision impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) fines not exceeding 1 % of the total global turnover in the preceding financial year, where they intentionally or negligently:

Amendment  220

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 60 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission may, by decision, impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), as applicable, periodic penalty payments not exceeding 5 % of the average daily turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision, in order to compel them to:	1. The Commission may, by decision, impose on the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), as applicable, periodic penalty payments not exceeding 5 % of the average daily global turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision, in order to compel them to:

Amendment  221

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 64 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall publish the decisions it adopts pursuant to Articles 55(1), 56(1), 58, 59 and 60. Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed.	1. The Commission shall publish the decisions it adopts pursuant to Articles 55(1), 56(1), 58, 59 and 60. Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, along with, where possible, non-confidential documents or other forms of information on which the decision is based.

Amendment  222

 

Proposal for a regulation

Article 73 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the European Parliament, the Council, and other relevant bodies or sources.	3. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the European Parliament, the Council, and other relevant bodies or sources, and pay specific attention to small and medium-sized enterprises and the position of new competitors.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC
References	COM(2020)0825 – C9-0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD)
Committee responsible  Date announced in plenary	IMCO 8.2.2021
Opinion by  Date announced in plenary	ITRE 8.2.2021
Associated committees - date announced in plenary	20.5.2021
Rapporteur for the opinion  Date appointed	Henna Virkkunen 15.12.2020
Discussed in committee	17.6.2021	15.7.2021
Date adopted	27.9.2021
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	46 22 6
Members present for the final vote	Nicola Beer, François-Xavier Bellamy, Hildegard Bentele, Tom Berendsen, Vasile Blaga, Michael Bloss, Paolo Borchia, Marc Botenga, Markus Buchheit, Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, Jerzy Buzek, Carlo Calenda, Maria da Graça Carvalho, Ignazio Corrao, Ciarán Cuffe, Josianne Cutajar, Nicola Danti, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Martina Dlabajová, Valter Flego, Niels Fuglsang, Lina Gálvez Muñoz, Claudia Gamon, Nicolás González Casares, Christophe Grudler, András Gyürk, Henrike Hahn, Robert Hajšel, Ivo Hristov, Ivars Ijabs, Romana Jerković, Eva Kaili, Izabela-Helena Kloc, Łukasz Kohut, Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Andrius Kubilius, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Thierry Mariani, Marisa Matias, Joëlle Mélin, Dan Nica, Angelika Niebler, Ville Niinistö, Aldo Patriciello, Mauri Pekkarinen, Mikuláš Peksa, Tsvetelina Penkova, Morten Petersen, Markus Pieper, Clara Ponsatí Obiols, Manuela Ripa, Robert Roos, Sara Skyttedal, Maria Spyraki, Jessica Stegrud, Beata Szydło, Riho Terras, Grzegorz Tobiszowski, Patrizia Toia, Evžen Tošenovský, Marie Toussaint, Isabella Tovaglieri, Viktor Uspaskich, Henna Virkkunen, Pernille Weiss, Carlos Zorrinho
Substitutes present for the final vote	Erik Bergkvist, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Cornelia Ernst, Valérie Hayer, Elena Lizzi, Jutta Paulus, Sandra Pereira, Angelika Winzig

 

 

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

46	+
NI	Viktor Uspaskich#
PPE	François-Xavier Bellamy, Hildegard Bentele, Tom Berendsen, Vasile Blaga, Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, Jerzy Buzek, Maria da Graça Carvalho, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Andrius Kubilius, Angelika Niebler, Aldo Patriciello, Markus Pieper, Sara Skyttedal, Maria Spyraki, Riho Terras, Henna Virkkunen, Pernille Weiss, Angelika Winzig
Renew	Nicola Beer, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Nicola Danti, Martina Dlabajová, Valter Flego, Claudia Gamon, Christophe Grudler, Valérie Hayer, Ivars Ijabs, Mauri Pekkarinen, Morten Petersen
S&D	Erik Bergkvist, Carlo Calenda, Josianne Cutajar, Niels Fuglsang, Lina Gálvez Muñoz, Nicolás González Casares, Robert Hajšel, Ivo Hristov, Romana Jerković, Eva Kaili, Łukasz Kohut, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Dan Nica, Tsvetelina Penkova, Patrizia Toia, Carlos Zorrinho

 

22	-
ECR	Izabela-Helena Kloc, Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Robert Roos, Jessica Stegrud, Beata Szydło, Grzegorz Tobiszowski, Evžen Tošenovský
ID	Paolo Borchia, Markus Buchheit, Elena Lizzi, Isabella Tovaglieri
The Left	Marc Botenga, Sandra Pereira
Verts/ALE	Michael Bloss, Ignazio Corrao, Ciarán Cuffe, Henrike Hahn, Ville Niinistö, Jutta Paulus, Mikuláš Peksa, Manuela Ripa, Marie Toussaint

 

6	0
ID	Thierry Mariani, Joëlle Mélin
NI	András Gyürk, Clara Ponsatí Obiols
The Left	Cornelia Ernst, Marisa Matias

 

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

 

 

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS (11.10.2021)

for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC

(COM(2020)0825 – C9‑0418/2020 – 2020/0361(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Geoffroy Didier

(*) Associated committee – Rule 57 of the Rules of Procedure

 

 

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The DSA should cover all digital services that play an important role in the dissemination of illegal content, in order to subject their content moderation practices to adequate regulation. That is why I clarified the scope of the DSA in order to explicitly target 3 types of services that play a major role in the dissemination of content: search engines, live-streaming services of user-generated content and messaging services.

These three categories of services should be subject, firstly, to the obligations currently provided for all intermediary services, and secondly, to the risk assessment and mitigation obligations applied to very large platforms, when they exceed the relevant thresholds. Live-streaming services and messaging services should also fall under certain obligations applicable to hosting services and online platforms, to the extent that these obligations can be applied to them. For example, these services can and should comply with obligations related to suspension of accounts and to guarantees offered to users in case of sanctions.

In the background of the fast expansion in recent years and in particular during the Covid-19 pandemic, online marketplaces have induced a number of threats regarding consumer protection, both in terms of enforcement of consumers’ rights and of product safety and product compliance. Furthermore, these marketplaces give rise to growing concerns as to industrial property rights and counterfeiting, and more generally to growing concerns about the setting of an unlevel playing field, whereby compliant companies increasingly undergo unfair competition from incompliant ones.

For example, the investigations of the 10 main online marketplaces illustrated that, on average, 63 % of the products proposed to European consumers were non-compliant and 28% of these products were actually dangerous, such rates being significantly higher than those found for “brick and mortar” retailers.

Such situation is undoubtedly linked to a loophole in the current legal framework, which allows online marketplaces to escape from a number of basic requirements, the lack of which makes it impossible to ensure a reasonable and satisfactory level of protection of the European consumers purchasing online. The wider the market share of online marketplaces, the higher such risk, and the more worrisome it is.

Given the foregoing, in order to bring this loophole to an end, and thus to rule out such increasing risk, it appears indispensable to add to the DSA a number of additional specific provisions for online platforms offering marketplaces services.

Another one problem is the application of the so-called “country of origin principle” that could result, given the current establishment of content platforms in the EU, in a few national authorities being the only authorities empowered to enforce the DSA. These authorities might not be able to fulfill their roles. Furthermore, the proposed scheme would not allow national specificities to be properly taken into account for the regulation of content. The DSA must therefore be adjusted in order to explicitly confer prerogatives of intervention upon the competent authorities of the country of destination (e.g. power of access to data, involvement in the investigation and decision-making, power to take action on a problem affecting its territory, direct intervention in the event of unjustified inaction by the authority of the country of establishment).

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment  1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1) Information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council25, new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and marketplaces, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel ways. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks and challenges, both for individual users and for society as a whole.	(1) Information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council25, new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and marketplaces, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel and innovative ways, transforming their communication, connection, consumption and business habits on the one hand, and bringing about societal and economic transformations in the Union on the other. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks and challenges, both for individual users for example in the form of financial fraud and scams on social networks and for society as a whole.
_________________	_________________
25 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).	25 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).

Amendment  2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services. Those diverging national laws negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice.	(2) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws on the matters covered by this Regulation, imposing, in particular, diligence requirements for providers of intermediary services. Those diverging national laws create regulatory fragmentation and negatively affect the internal market, which, pursuant to Article 26 of the Treaty, comprises an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods and services and freedom of establishment are ensured, taking into account the inherently cross-border nature of the internet, which is generally used to provide those services. The conditions for the provision of intermediary services across the internal market should be harmonised, so as to provide businesses with access to new markets and opportunities to exploit the benefits of the internal market, while allowing consumers and other recipients of the services to have increased choice, striking a proper balance between support for innovation on the one hand and protection for consumers and other service users on the other.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and the right to non-discrimination.	(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, accessible predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information, the freedom to conduct a business, privacy and personal data protection, the right to non-discrimination and access to justice.

Amendment  4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.	(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 should not be hampered but instead be stimulated and fundamental rightsrespected.

Amendment  5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States can be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.	(8) Such a substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the service provider has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number of users in one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States should be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of an application in the relevant national application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 . On the other hand, mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union cannot, on that ground alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union.
_________________	_________________
27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).	27 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L351, 20.12.2012, p.1).

Amendment  6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. However, the rules of this Regulation apply in respect of issues that are not or not fully addressed by those other acts as well as issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures at national level.	(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, among others, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. This Regulation should also respect the competences of Member States to adopt laws promoting freedom and pluralism of the media as well as cultural and linguistic diversity.This Regulation should not affect Member States’ freedom to regulate more strongly issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures at national level. In the event of a conflict between Directive 2010/13/EU as amended and this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU as well as the national measures taken in accordance with that Directive should prevail. To assist Member States and providers, the Commission should provide guidelines as to how to interpret the interaction between different Union acts and how to prevent any duplication of requirements on providers or potential conflicts in the interpretation of similar requirements.
_________________	_________________
28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .	28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 .
29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation	29 Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation

Amendment  7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33 as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union law on working conditions.	(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33 as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council37a, Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council37b, and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union law on working conditions.
_________________	_________________
30 Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1).	30 Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1).
31 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).	31 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).
32 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.	32 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37.
33 Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC.	33 Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC.
34 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)	34 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)
35 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.	35 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.
36 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts.	36 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts.
37 Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules	37 Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules
	37a Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR) (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 63).
	37b Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36).
38 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).	38 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

Amendment  8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.	(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected and are lex specialis, prevailing over this Regulation.
	________________
	1a Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 92).

Amendment  9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood 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.	(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, accessible, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should underpin the general idea that what is illegal offline should also be illegal online. The concept should be defined broadly and also covers information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities.  In particular, that concept should be understood 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 is not in compliance with Union law since it refers 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 dangerous or counterfeit products, illegal trading of animals, plants and substances, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material, the provision of illegal services such as hosting services on short-term accommodation rental platforms which do not conform to Union or national law, 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  10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a) Material disseminated for educational, journalistic, artistic or research purposes or for the purposes of preventing or countering illegal content including the content which represents an expression of polemic or controversial views in the course of public debate should not be considered as illegal content. Similarly, material, such as an eye-witness video of a potential crime, should not be considered as illegal, merely because it depicts an illegal act. An assessment should determine the true purpose of that dissemination and whether material is disseminated to the public for those purposes.

Amendment  11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, such as social networks or online marketplaces, should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of another service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.	(13) Considering the particular characteristics of the services concerned and the corresponding need to make the providers thereof subject to certain specific obligations, it is necessary to distinguish, within the broader category of providers of hosting services as defined in this Regulation, the subcategory of online platforms. Online platforms, search engines, social networks, content-sharing platforms, or online marketplaces and live streaming platforms or instant messaging services providers should be defined as providers of hosting services that not only store information provided by the recipients of the service at their request, but that also disseminate that information to the public, again at their request. However, in order to avoid imposing overly broad obligations, providers of hosting services should not be considered as online platforms where the dissemination to the public is merely a minor and purely ancillary feature of the principal service and that feature cannot, for objective technical reasons, be used without that other, principal service, and the integration of that feature is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules of this Regulation applicable to online platforms. For example, the comments section in an online newspaper could constitute such a feature, where it is clear that it is ancillary to the main service represented by the publication of news under the editorial responsibility of the publisher.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a finite number of pre-determined persons. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information.	(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a large or potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a number of pre-determined. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outside the scope of this Regulation. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information..
_________________	_________________
39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36	39 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36

Amendment  13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16) The legal certainty provided by the horizontal framework of conditional exemptions from liability for providers of intermediary services, laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC, has allowed many novel services to emerge and scale-up across the internal market. That framework should therefore be preserved. However, in view of the divergences when transposing and applying the relevant rules at national level, and for reasons of clarity and coherence, that framework should be incorporated in this Regulation. It is also necessary to clarify certain elements of that framework, having regard to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.	(16) The legal certainty provided by the horizontal framework of conditional exemptions from liability for providers of intermediary services, laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC, has allowed many novel services to emerge and scale-up across the internal market. That framework should therefore be preserved. However, in view of the divergences when transposing and applying the relevant rules at national level, and for reasons of clarity, consistency, predictability, accessibility and coherence, that framework should be incorporated in this Regulation. It is also necessary to clarify certain elements of that framework, having regard to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.	(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider. The provider of intermediary services is considered to play an active role when it organises and references the content, regardless of whether this is automated or not.

Amendment  15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20) A provider of intermediary services that deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities does not provide its service neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.	(20) A provider of intermediary services the main purpose of which is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities does not provide its service neutrally and should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.

Amendment  16

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved with the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.	(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved with the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature, such as network management, which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted.

Amendment  17

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 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.	(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 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation 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  18

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.	(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, including online financial transactions, providers of hosting services, online platforms and other service providers such as marketplaces that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue, including online financial transactions, in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.

Amendment  19

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 25

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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.	(25) In order to create legal certainty, ensuring that the regulatory framework provisions are applied in a proportional manner, and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content 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 and accompanied by additional safeguards. 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 or national 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 set out in this Regulation. Therefore, any such activities and measures that a given provider may have taken in order to detect, identify and act against illegal content on a voluntary basis 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  20

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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 that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.	(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. 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, although they do not fall within the obligations under this Regulation, too, can benefit from the exemptions from liability, to the extent that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content.	(28) Member States are prevented from imposing a monitoring obligation on service providers only with respect to obligations of a general nature, imposing constant content identification from the entirety of available content. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case, where set down in Union acts and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, that implements Union acts in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation and other Union lex specialis. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content or as an obligation to use automated content-filtering tools. Equally, nothing in this Regulation should prevent providers from enacting end-to-end encrypting of their services.

Amendment  22

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(28a) Providers of intermediary services should not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation as such tools have difficulties of effectively understanding the subtlety of context and meaning in human communication, which is necessary to determine whether assessed content violates the law or terms of service.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 29

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the processing of those orders.	(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws in conformity with the Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations, often leading to fragmentation of the internal market. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain uniform conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the effective processing of those orders. The applicable rules on the mutual recognition of court decisions should be unaffected.

Amendment  24

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.	(30) Orders to act against illegal content or to provide information should be issued in compliance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and the prohibition of general obligations to monitor information or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity laid down in this Regulation. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Regulation which apply to orders to act against illegal content are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar systems for acting against specific types of illegal content, such as Regulation (EU) …/…. [proposed Regulation addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online], or Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 that confers specific powers to order the provision of information on Member State consumer law enforcement authorities, whilst the conditions and requirements that apply to orders to provide information are without prejudice to other Union acts providing for similar relevant rules for specific sectors. Those conditions and requirements should be without prejudice to retention and preservation rules under applicable national law, in conformity with Union law and confidentiality requests by law enforcement authorities related to the non-disclosure of information.

Amendment  25

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity.	(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity. In this context and to maintain proportionality, orders addressed to a provider that has its main establishment in another Member State or outside the Union should be limited to the Member State issuing the order, unless the legal basis for the order is Union law.

Amendment  26

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 32

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(32) The orders to provide information regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. Therefore, orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information.	(32) The orders to provide information regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. This information should include legally collected information, such as the relevant e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, and other contact details necessary to ensure such compliance. Therefore, orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information.

Amendment  27

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.	(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information as defined in Union or national law in accordance with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, respectively, where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.

Amendment  28

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 34

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure a safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities.	(34) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, and in particular to improve the functioning of the internal market and ensure an accessible, safe and transparent online environment, it is necessary to establish a clear, predictable and balanced set of harmonised due diligence obligations for providers of intermediary services. Those obligations should aim in particular to guarantee different public policy objectives such as the safety and trust of the recipients of the service, including minors and vulnerable users, such as those with protected characteristics under Article 21 of the Charter, protect the relevant fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, to ensure meaningful accountability of those providers and to empower recipients and other affected parties, whilst facilitating the necessary oversight by competent authorities, ensuring the right balance between support for innovation on the one hand and protection for consumers and users on the other.

Amendment  29

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 35

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(35) In that regard, it is important that the due diligence obligations are adapted to the type and nature of the intermediary service concerned. This Regulation therefore sets out basic obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services, as well as additional obligations for providers of hosting services and, more specifically, online platforms and very large online platforms. To the extent that providers of intermediary services may fall within those different categories in view of the nature of their services and their size, they should comply with all of the corresponding obligations of this Regulation. Those harmonised due diligence obligations, which should be reasonable and non-arbitrary, are needed to achieve the identified public policy concerns, such as safeguarding the legitimate interests of the recipients of the service, addressing illegal practices and protecting fundamental rights online.	(35) In order to make sure that the obligations are only applied to those providers of intermediary services where the benefit would outweigh the burden on the provider, the Commission should be empowered to issue a waiver to the requirements of chapter III, in whole or in parts, to those providers of intermediary services that are non-for-profit or pursue a public interest mission and are SMEs without any systemic risk related to illegal content. Providers shall present justified reasons for why they should be issued a waiver. The Commission should examine such an application and has the authority to issue or revoke a waiver at any time. The Commission should maintain a public list of all waivers issued and their conditions containing a description on why the provider is justified a waiver.

Amendment  30

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .	(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant and up-to-date information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .

Amendment  31

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with.	(37) Providers of intermediary services that are established in a third country that offer services in the Union should designate a sufficiently mandated legal representative in the Union and provide information relating to their legal representatives, so as to allow for the effective oversight and, where necessary, enforcement of this Regulation in relation to those providers. It should be possible for the legal representative to also function as point of contact, provided the relevant requirements of this Regulation are complied with. In order to avoid disproportionate burden, micro and small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC1a should be exempt from the obligation to designate a legal representative.
	____________
	1a Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).

Amendment  32

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes.	(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes. In particular, it is important to ensure that terms and conditions are fair, non-discriminatory and transparent, and are drafted in a clear and unambiguous language in line with applicable Union law. The terms and conditions should include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making, human review, the legal consequences to be faced by the users for knowingly storing or uploading illegal content as well as on the right to terminate the use of the service. Providers of intermediary services should also provide recipients of services with a concise and easily readable summary of the main elements of the terms and conditions, including the remedies available.

Amendment  33

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(38a) Providers can take voluntary measures for general risk assessments of potential risks related to their services, for example in relations with minors. Those measures should not lead to any new profiling, tracking or identification obligations on providers of intermediary services.

Amendment  34

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(38b) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not be available to providers of intermediary services that do not comply with the obligations set out in this Regulation. The non-compliance may affect the possibility of benefiting from the liability exemption, as the aim of this Regulation is to ensure that the standards to qualify for such exemptions contribute to a high level of safety and trust in the online environment.

Amendment  35

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should annually report, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.40	(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should annually report, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In any public versions of such reports providers of intermediary services should remove any information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider’s terms and conditions.
_________________
40 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  36

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.	(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place easily accessible, comprehensive and user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide, based on its own assessment, whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. Online platforms should try to prevent that a content which has already been identified as illegal and that has been removed on the basis of a prior notice, reappears again. The application of it should not lead to any general obligation and should be subject to human review. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation. Furthermore, the notice and action mechanism should be complemented by ‘stay down’ provisions whereby providers of hosting services should demonstrate their best efforts in order to prevent from reappearing content which is identical to another piece of content that has already been identified and removed by them as illegal. The application of this requirement should not lead to any general monitoring obligation.

Amendment  37

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(40a) Notices should be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act and the closest relationship to the recipient of the service that provided the information or content, such as to an online platform and not to the hosting service provider on which provides services to that online platform. Such hosting service providers should redirect such notices to the particular online platform and inform the notifying party of this fact.

Amendment  38

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(40b) Hosting providers should seek to act only against the items of information notified. This may include acts such as disabling hyperlinking to the items of information. Where the removal or disabling of access to individual items of information is technically or operationally unachievable due to legal, contractual, or technological reasons, such as encrypted file and data storage and sharing services, hosting providers should inform the recipient of the service of the notification and seek action. If a recipient fails to act or delays action, or the provider has reason to believe has failed to act or otherwise acts in bad faith, the hosting provider may suspend their service in line with their terms and conditions.

Amendment  39

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 41 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(41a) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, either because it is illegal or is not allowed under its terms and conditions, it should do so in a timely manner, taking into account the potential harm of the infraction and the technical abilities of the provider.

Amendment  40

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.	(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that have proven to be efficient, proportionate and reliable, that provider may prevent the reappearance of the notified or equivalent illegal information. The provider should also inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress. However, the information to the recipient should not be required if it relates to spam, removal of content similar or identical to content already removed from the same recipient, who has already received a statement.

Amendment  41

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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.	(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 or are held or controlled by entities established outside the Union. 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.
_________________	_________________
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).	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  42

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43a) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide, based on its own assessment, whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.

Amendment  43

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43b) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property, and the right to non-discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.

Amendment  44

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 44

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost-effective manner. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.	(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies located in either the Member State of the recipient or the provider and that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost-effective manner. Dispute resolution proceedings should be concluded within a reasonable period of time. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.

Amendment  45

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 46

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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	(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 or those of individual rightholders 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. 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 same should be granted to applicants within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 or in case of complaints pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 so as to ensure that existing rules regarding custom enforcement or consumer protection are effectively implemented to online sale. 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
__________________	__________________
43 Regulation (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	43 Regulation (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  46

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 47

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.	(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by repeatedly providing illegal content, facilitating the repeated uploading of illegal content or by frequently submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate and effective safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be illegal content and notices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend or terminate their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.

Amendment  47

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 48

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, 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 enforcement 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.	(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 commit a serious criminal offence involving an imminent threat to the life or safety of person, 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 enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing upon request 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.
_________________	_________________
44 Directive 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).	44 Directive 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  48

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 48 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(48a) Where an online platform becomes aware of any information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or is likely to take place, it shall remove or disable the content and promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide all available relevant information.

Amendment  49

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 49

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential information to the online platform, including for purposes of promoting messages on or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online platforms should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.	(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online marketplaces should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential and accurate information to the providers of online marketplace, including for purposes of promoting messages on products or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online marketplaces should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.

Amendment  50

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online platforms covered should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. However, the online platforms covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online platforms, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such online platforms should also design and organise their online interface in a way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48 .	(50) To ensure an efficient and adequate application of that obligation, without imposing any disproportionate burdens, the online marketplaces covered should make reasonable efforts to verify the reliability of the information provided by the traders concerned, in particular by using freely available official online databases and online interfaces, such as national trade registers and the VAT Information Exchange System45 , or by requesting the traders concerned to provide trustworthy supporting documents, such as copies of identity documents, certified bank statements, company certificates and trade register certificates. They may also use other sources, available for use at a distance, which offer a similar degree of reliability for the purpose of complying with this obligation. Additionally this information provided by the trader should be sufficiently specific and supported, where possible. However, the online marketplaces covered should not be required to engage in excessive or costly online fact-finding exercises or to carry out verifications on the spot. Nor should such online marketplaces, which have made the reasonable efforts required by this Regulation, be understood as guaranteeing the reliability of the information towards consumer or other interested parties. Such online marketplaces should also design and organise their online interface in a user-friendly way that enables traders to comply with their obligations under Union law, in particular the requirements set out in Articles 6 and 8 of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , Article 7 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council47 and Article 3 of Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council48
_________________	_________________
45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en	45 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/vies/vieshome.do?selectedLanguage=en
46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council	46 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)	47 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’)
48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers	48 Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products offered to consumers

Amendment  51

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 52

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.	(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have an easy access to information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.

Amendment  52

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 53

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.	(53) Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service, in facilitating public debate, economic and financial transactions and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas and in influencing how recipients obtain and communicate information online, it is necessary to impose specific obligations on those platforms, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms. Those additional obligations on very large online platforms are necessary to address those public policy concerns, including regarding misleading information or any other types of illegal content there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result.

Amendment  53

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 54

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.	(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses may have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.

Amendment  54

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 57

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.	(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including dangerous and counterfeit products or the display of copyright-infringing content. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition or the misuse of the platforms’ terms and conditions, including content moderation policies, when enforced. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, fundamental rights, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.

Amendment  55

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 58

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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. 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.	(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary and proportionate 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, prevent the intentional manipulation and exploitation of the service, including by the amplification of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions as well as making content moderation policies and the way they are enforced fully transparent for the users. 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. 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  56

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 59

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(59) Very large online platforms should, where appropriate, conduct their risk assessments and design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, representatives of groups potentially impacted by their services, independent experts and civil society organisations.	(59) Very large online platforms should, where appropriate, conduct their risk assessments and design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, representatives of groups potentially impacted by their services, independent experts and relevant public actors.

Amendment  57

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 60

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.	(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the auditor access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. Auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by researchers vetted by the competent authorities. Auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.

Amendment  58

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 61

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(61) The audit report should be substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken.	(61) The audit report should be independent and substantiated, so as to give a meaningful account of the activities undertaken and the conclusions reached. It should help inform, and where appropriate suggest improvements to the measures taken by the very large online platform to comply with their obligations under this Regulation. The report should be transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator and the Board without delay, together with the risk assessment and the mitigation measures, as well as the platform’s plans for addressing the audit’s recommendations. The report should include an audit opinion based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. A positive opinion should be given where all evidence shows that the very large online platform complies with the obligations laid down by this Regulation or, where applicable, any commitments it has undertaken pursuant to a code of conduct or crisis protocol, in particular by identifying, evaluating and mitigating the systemic risks posed by its system and services. A positive opinion should be accompanied by comments where the auditor wishes to include remarks that do not have a substantial effect on the outcome of the audit. A negative opinion should be given where the auditor considers that the very large online platform does not comply with this Regulation or the commitments undertaken.

Amendment  59

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 62

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient.	(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have an impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient.

Amendment  60

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 62 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(62a) The practice of very large online platforms to associate advertisement with content uploaded by users could indirectly lead to the monetisation and promotion of illegal content, or content that is in breach of their terms and conditions and could risk to considerably damage the brand image of the buyers of advertising space. In order to prevent such practice, the very large online platforms should ensure, including through standard contractual guarantees to the buyers of advertising space, that the content to which they associate advertisements is legal, and compliant with their terms and conditions. Furthermore, the very large online platforms should allow advertisers to have direct access to the results of audits carried out independently and evaluating the commitments and tools of platforms for protecting the brand image of the buyers of advertising space ('brand safety').

Amendment  61

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 63

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.	(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms could pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement. In addition, very large online platforms should label any known deep fake video, audio or other files.

Amendment  62

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 64

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.	(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms, such as the dissemination of illegal content or amplification of illegal content brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for providing information or compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers, which meet the conditions set out in this regulation, where relevant to a research project. All requests for providing information or access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.

Amendment  63

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 65 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(65a) Minimum interoperability requirements for very large online platforms could create new opportunities for the development of innovative services, limit lock-in effects of existing platforms due to network effect and could therefore improve competition and users choice. In order to facilitate free choice of recipients between different services, interoperability for industry-standard features of very large online platforms should be considered. Such interoperability could empower recipients to choose a service based on its functionality and features.

Amendment  64

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 67

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.	(67) The Commission and the Board should encourage the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation, as well as the compliance of online platforms with the provisions of these codes. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.

Amendment  65

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 68

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.	(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society and democracy, such as disinformation, illegal content or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.

Amendment  66

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 69

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, the Commission will issue guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan.	(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech.

Amendment  67

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 70

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.	(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts should support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.

Amendment  68

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 76

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.	(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV and Articles 8 and 9 by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.

Amendment  69

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 77

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(77) Member States should provide the Digital Services Coordinator, and any other competent authority designated under this Regulation, with sufficient powers and means to ensure effective investigation and enforcement. Digital Services Coordinators should in particular be able to search for and obtain information which is located in its territory, including in the context of joint investigations, with due regard to the fact that oversight and enforcement measures concerning a provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State should be adopted by the Digital Services Coordinator of that other Member State, where relevant in accordance with the procedures relating to cross-border cooperation.	(77) Member States should provide the Digital Services Coordinator, and any other competent authority designated under this Regulation, with sufficient powers and means to ensure effective investigation and enforcement. Digital Services Coordinators should in particular be able to search for and obtain information which is located in its territory, including in the context of joint investigations, with due regard to the fact that oversight and enforcement measures concerning a provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State should be adopted by the Digital Services Coordinator of that other Member State, where relevant in accordance with the procedures relating to cross-border cooperation. Member States should also consider specialised training, in cooperation with Union bodies, offices and agencies, for relevant national authorities, in particular administrative authorities, who are responsible for issuing orders to act against illegal content and provide information.

Amendment  70

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 78

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation.	(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation. In order to ensure coherence between the Member States, the Commission should adopt guidance on the procedures and rules related to the powers of Digital Services Coordinators.

Amendment  71

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 91

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non-discrimination, data protection, electronic communications, audiovisual services, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.	(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non-discrimination, data protection, respect for intellectual property, competition, electronic communications, audiovisual services, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.

Amendment  72

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 97 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(97a) The Commission should ensure that it is independent and impartial in its decision making in regards to both Digital Services Coordinators and providers of services under this Regulation.

Amendment  73

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 99

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(99) In particular, the Commission should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers.	(99) In particular, the Commission, where it can show grounds for believing that a very large online platform is not compliant with this Regulation, should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information related to those concerns. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers.

Amendment  74

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 106 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(106a) In order to promote the freedom of expression and media pluralism online, the importance of editorial content and services must be recognised, requiring intermediary service providers to refrain from removing, suspending or disabling access to it. It follows that intermediary service providers should be exempt from liability for editorial content and services. Intermediary service providers should put mechanisms in place to facilitate the practical application, for example, the flagging of lawful editorial content and services by content providers. Providers of editorial content and services should be identified by the Member State in which the provider is established. Those providers should be understood as performing an economic activity within the meaning of Articles 56 and 57 TFEU.

Amendment  75

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. This Regulation lays down harmonised rules on the provision of intermediary services in the internal market. In particular, it establishes:	1. This Regulation lays down harmonised rules on the provision of intermediary services in order to improve the functioning of the internal market whilst ensuring the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society. In particular, it establishes:

Amendment  76

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) set out uniform rules for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.	(b) set out uniform, proportionate, harmonised rules for a safe, predictable, accessible and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.

Amendment  77

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) facilitate innovation, support digital transition, encourage economic growth and create a level playing field for digital services within the internal market;

Amendment  78

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(bb) protect consumers making use of services falling under this Regulation.

Amendment  79

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. This Regulation shall apply to instant messaging services used for purposes others than private or non-commercial.

Amendment  80

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) Directive 2010/13/EC;	(b) Directive 2010/13/EC as amended by Directive 2018/1808/EU;

Amendment  81

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) Union law on copyright and related rights;	(c) Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790;

Amendment  82

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394;	(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Regulation XXX (General Product Safety Regulation);

Amendment  83

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ia) Directive (EU) 2019/882;

Amendment  84

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ib) Directive 2006/123/EC.

Amendment  85

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. The Commission shall by ... [within one year of the adoption of this Regulation] publish guidelines with regard to the relations between this Regulation and legislative acts listed in paragraph 5. Those guidelines shall clarify any potential conflicts between the conditions and obligations listed in those legislative acts and which act prevails where actions, in line with this Regulation, fulfil the obligations of another legislative act and which regulatory authority is competent.

Amendment  86

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 1a
	Contractual provisions
	Any contractual provisions between an intermediary service provider and a trader, business user or a recipient of its service which are contrary to this Regulation shall be unenforceable.

Amendment  87

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) 'active end user' means an individual successfully accessing an online interface and having significant interaction with it, its product or service;

Amendment  88

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) ‘consumer’ means any natural person who is acting for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business or profession;	(c) ‘consumer’ means any natural person who is acting for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business, craft or profession;

Amendment  89

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) ‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession;	(e) ‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person marketing products and/or services in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession, or any natural or legal person that is offering goods, digital content or services on a commercial scale;

Amendment  90

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) ‘intermediary service’ means one of the following services:	(f) ‘intermediary service’ means one of the following information society services:

Amendment  91

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
‒ a ‘hosting’ service that consists of the storage of information provided by, and at the request of, a recipient of the service;	‒ a ‘hosting’ service that consists of the storage of information provided by, and at the request of, a recipient of the service, and which does not have any active role in data processing;

Amendment  92

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 4 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	‒ an online platform within the meaning of point (h);

Amendment  93

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 5 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	‒ an online search engine as defined in point (5) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150;

Amendment  94

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(fa) ‘live streaming platform services’ meansinformation society services of which the main or one of the main purposes is to give the public access to audio or video material that is live broadcasted by its users, which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes;

Amendment  95

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information,, which, in itself or by its reference to an activity, including the sale of products or provision of services is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;	(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information which, in itself or by its reference to illegal content, products, services or activity, including financial fraud, is not in compliance with Union law or the criminal, administrative or civil legal framework of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;

Amendment  96

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(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 another service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that other service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.	(h) ‘online platform’ means a provider of a hosting service which stores and disseminates to the public information and optimises its content, unless that activity is a minor and purely ancillary feature of service or functionality of the principal service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that principal 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  97

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ha) ‘online marketplace’ means a service using software, including a website or an application, operated by or on behalf of a trader which allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with other traders or consumers;

Amendment  98

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(hb) ‘editorial platform’ means an intermediary service which is in connection with a press publication within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790 or another editorial media service and which allows users to discuss topics generally covered by the relevant media or to comment editorial content and which is under the supervision of the editorial team of the publication or other editorial media;

Amendment  99

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(hc) ‘online social networking service’ means a platform that enables end users to connect, share, discover and communicate with each other across multiple devices and, in particular, via chats, posts, videos and recommendations;

Amendment  100

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(i) ‘dissemination to the public’ means making information available, at the request of the recipient of the service who provided the information, to a potentially unlimited number of third parties;	(i) ‘dissemination to the public’ means taking an active role in making information available, at the request of the recipient of the service who provided the information, to a significant and potentially unlimited number of third parties;

Amendment  101

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ia) ‘deep fake’ means a generated or manipulated image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful;

Amendment  102

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system used by an online platform to suggest in its online interface specific information to recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;	(o) ‘recommender system’ means a fully or partially automated system, used by a very large online platform to suggest, classify, prioritise or organise in its online interface specific information for recipients of the service, including as a result of a search initiated by the recipient or otherwise determining the relative order or prominence of information displayed;

Amendment  103

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities undertaken by providers of intermediary services aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;	(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities undertaken by providers of intermediary services, whether automated or processed by a person, aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;

 

Amendment  104

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services.	(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications provided by the provider of intermediary services, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services;

Amendment  105

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(qa) ‘dark pattern’ means a user interface designed or manipulated with the substantial effect of subverting or impairing user autonomy, decision-making or choice.

Amendment  106

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 2a
	Digital privacy
	1. Where technically possible, a provider of an information society service shall enable the use of and payment for that service without collecting personal data of the recipient.
	2. A provider of an information society service shall process personal data concerning the use of the service by a recipient only to the extent strictly necessary to enable the recipient to use the service or to charge the recipient for the use of the service.

Amendment  107

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network, the service provider shall not be liable for the information transmitted, on condition that the provider:	1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network, or an improvement of the security of that transmission, the service provider shall not be liable for the information transmitted, on condition that the provider:

Amendment  108

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	3. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or functionally independent administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  109

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	2. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or functionally independent administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  110

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove or to disable access to the illegal content.	(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, expeditiously, decisively and permanently removes or disables access to the illegal content if the content or activity is to be deemed illegal within the meaning of Article 2(g);

Amendment  111

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Without prejudice to specific deadlines, set out in Union law or within administrative or legal orders, providers of hosting services shall, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness, remove or disable access to illegal content as soon as possible and in any event:
	(a) within 30 minutes where the illegal content pertains to the broadcast of a live sports or entertainment event;
	(b) within 24 hours where the illegal content can seriously harm public policy, public security or public health or seriously harm consumers’ health or safety;
	(c) within 72 hours in all other cases where the illegal content does not seriously harm public policy, public security, public health or consumers’ health or safety;

Amendment  112

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply where the recipient of the service is acting under the authority or the control of the provider.	2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply:
	(a) where the recipient of the service is acting under the authority or the control of the provider;
	(b) when the main purpose of the information society service is to engage in or facilitate illegal activities or when the provider of the information society service deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities;
	(c) where the provider of intermediary services plays an active role in, for instance, providing, controlling, optimising, classifying, organising, referencing or promoting of the content.

Amendment  113

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – Paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe 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.	3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability of an online markeplace, where such a marketplace presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe 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.

Amendment  114

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – Paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.	4. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a court or a functionally independent administrative authority, in accordance with Member States' legal systems, of requiring the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.

Amendment  115

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
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 to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation.	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 to comply with the requirements of Union law, or national law, in accordance with Union law, including  the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and the requirements set out in this Regulation.

Amendment  116

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a.  Paragraph 1 shall apply only when intermediary services are compliant with due diligence obligations laid down in this Regulation.

Amendment  117

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b.  Voluntary own-initiative investigations shall not lead to ex-ante control measures based on automated content moderation tools.

Amendment  118

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that measures taken pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be effective, specific and targeted. Such measures should be accompanied with appropriate safeguards, such as human oversight, documentation, traceability or any additional measures to ensure that own initiative investigations are accurate, non-discriminatory, proportionate, transparent and not lead to over-removal of content.

Amendment  119

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
No general monitoring or active fact-finding obligations	No general monitoring or automated content moderation or active fact-finding obligations

Amendment  120

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers.	1. No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers. Providers of intermediary services shall not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation.

Amendment  121

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2. This Regulation shall not prevent providers from offering end-to-end encrypted services. The provision of such services shall not constitute a reason for liability or for becoming ineligible for the exemptions from liability.

Amendment  122

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order to act against a specific item of illegal content, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities, on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order to act against a specific item of illegal content, received from and issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities, on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.

Amendment  123

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. If the provider cannot comply with the removal order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that has issued the order.

Amendment  124

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	– identification of the competent judicial or administrative authority;

Amendment  125

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	– reference to the legal basis for the order;

Amendment  126

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– information about redress available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content;	– information about redress mechanisms available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content;

Amendment  127

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10.	(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;

Amendment  128

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement;

Amendment  129

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders.

Amendment  130

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. Member States shall ensure that providers have a right to appeal and object to implementing the order and shall facilitate the use and access to that right.

Amendment  131

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law in conformity with Union law.	4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to civil court decisions and requirements under national criminal procedural law in conformity with Union law.

Amendment  132

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to data confidentiality and commercial secrecy requirements, in conformity with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Amendment  133

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts, organising a European information exchange system, allowing for secure communication and authentication of authorised orders between relevant authorities, Digital Services Coordinators and providers, as referred to in Articles 8(1), 8a(1) and 9(1). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 70.

Amendment  134

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 8a
	Orders to restore lawful content
	1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order via a secure communications channel to restore a specific item or multiple items of removed content, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.
	2. Member States shall ensure that the orders referred to in paragraph 1 meet the following conditions:
	(a) the orders contain the following elements:
	(i) a statement of reasons explaining why the content in question is legal, by reference to the specific provision of Union or national law or court ruling;
	(ii) one or more exact uniform resource locators and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the legal content concerned;
	(iii) information about redress available to the provider of the service who removed the content and to the recipient of the service who notified the content;
	(b) the territorial scope of the order, on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective; and
	(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10.

Amendment  135

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, received from and issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order. Where no effect has been given to the order, a statement of the provider shall explain the reasons why the information cannot be provided to the national judicial or administrative authority that issued the order.

Amendment  136

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. If the provider cannot comply with the information order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that issued the information order.

Amendment  137

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– a statement of reasons explaining the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;	– a statement of reasons according to which the information is required and why this requirement is necessary and to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for official reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;

Amendment  138

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	– identification of the competent judicial or administrative authority;

Amendment  139

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	– reference to the legal basis for the order;

Amendment  140

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
– information about redress available to the provider and to the recipients of the service concerned;	– information about redress mechanisms available to the provider and to the recipients of the service concerned;

Amendment  141

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the order only requires the provider to provide information already collected for the purposes of providing the service and which lies within its control;	(b) the order only requires the provider to provide information already legally  collected for the purposes of providing the service and which lies within its control, such as e-mail addresses, telephone numbers and other contact details necessary to determine the compliance referred to in point (a);

Amendment  142

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10;	(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;

Amendment  143

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to receive the same specific item of information;

Amendment  144

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders. It shall ensure that form means the standards set down in the Annex of [XXX the regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters].

Amendment  145

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law in conformity with Union law.	4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to civil court decisions and requirements under national criminal procedural law  in conformity with Union law.

Amendment  146

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The conditions and requirements laid down in this Article shall be without prejudice to data confidentiality and commercial secrecy requirements, in conformity with Union law including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Amendment  147

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4b. The obligations under this Article shall not oblige providers of intermediary services to introduce new tracking of profiling techniques for recipients of the service in order to comply with orders to provide information.

Amendment  148

Proposal for a regulation

Article -10 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article -10
	Waiver
	1. Providers of intermediary services may apply to the Commission for a waiver from the requirements of Chapter III, if they prove that they are:
	(a) micro, small and medium entreprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, including when carrying out their activities on a non-for-profit basis or pursuant a public interest mission or;
	(b) a medium enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC without any systemic risk related to illegal content. The Providers shall present justified reasons for their request;
	(c) editorial platforms within the meaning of Article 2 (ha) of this Regulation;
	2. The providers of intermediary services carrying out their activities on a non-for-profit basis or pursuant a public interest mission shall be independent from any entity that operates on a for-profit basis for the purposes of this article;
	3. The Commission shall examine such an application and, after consulting the Board, may issue a waiver in whole or in parts to the requirements of this Chapter.
	4. Upon the request of the Board or the provider, or on its own initiative, the Commission may review a waiver issued and revoke the waiver in whole or in parts.
	5. The Commission shall maintain a list of all waivers issued and their conditions and shall publish this list to the public.

Amendment  149

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, in writing, a legal or natural person as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services.	1. Providers of intermediary services which do not have an establishment in the Union but which offer services in the Union shall designate, for those already existing as soon as possible, for those to be established prior to the establishment, in writing, a legal or natural person as their legal representative in one of the Member States where the provider offers its services. The Members States may require very large online platforms to designate a legal representative in their Member State.

Amendment  150

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall mandate their legal representatives to be addressed in addition to or instead of the provider by the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board on all issues necessary for the receipt of, compliance with and enforcement of decisions issued in relation to this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services shall provide their legal representative with the necessary powers and resource to cooperate with the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board and comply with those decisions.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall mandate their legal representatives to be addressed in addition to or instead of the provider by the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board on all issues necessary for the receipt of, compliance with and enforcement of decisions issued in relation to this Regulation. Providers of intermediary services shall provide their legal representative with the necessary powers and resources in order to guarantee their proper and timely cooperation with the Member States’ authorities, the Commission and the Board and compliance with those decisions.

Amendment  151

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Providers of intermediary services shall notify the name, address, the electronic mail address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established. They shall ensure that that information is up to date.	4. Providers of intermediary services shall notify the name, postal address, the electronic mail address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established. They shall ensure that that information is up to date. The Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonable efforts to assess its validity.

Amendment  152

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. Providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises  as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC, and who have been unsuccessful in obtaining the services of a legal representative after reasonable effort, shall be able to request that the Digital Service Coordinator of the Member State where the enterprise intends to obtain a legal representative facilitates further cooperation and recommends possible solutions, including possibilities for collective representation.

Amendment  153

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 5 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5b. Providers of online social networking services designated as very large online platform according to Article 25 shall designate a legal representative to be bound to obligations laid down in this Article at the request of the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member States where this provider offers its services.

 

Amendment  154

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.	1. Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that their terms and conditions prohibit the recipients of their services from providing content that is not in compliance with Union law or the law of the Member State where such information is made available.
	The terms and conditions shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear, plain, intelligible  and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format, in the languages in which the service is offered and include a searchable archive of previous versions with their date of application of the provider’s terms and conditions. Providers of intermediary services shall provide recipients of services with a concise and easily readable summary of the terms and conditions, including information on the available remedies and the possibilities for opt-out, where relevant.

Amendment  155

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a diligent, objective and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.	2. Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that any additional restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service are designed with due regard to the fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter.
	Providers of intermediary services shall enforce the restrictions referred to in the first subparagraph in a diligent, objective and proportionate manner, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved.

Amendment  156

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Where very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of this Regulation otherwise allow for the dissemination to the public of press publications within the meaning of Article 2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790 and of audiovisual media services within the meaning in Article 1(a) of Directive (EU) 2018/1808, such platforms shall not remove, disable access to, suspend or otherwise interfere with such content or the related service or suspend or terminate the related account on the basis of the alleged incompatibility of such content with its terms and conditions, unless it is illegal content.

Amendment  157

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. The Digital Services Coordinator of each Member State has the right to request very large online platforms, to apply measures and tools of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review reflecting Member State’s socio-cultural context. The framework for this cooperation as well as specific measures related thereto may be laid down in national legislation and shall be notified to the Commission.

Amendment  158

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. Providers of intermediary services shall refrain from any dark patterns or other techniques to encourage the acceptance of terms and conditions, including giving consent to sharing personal and non-personal data.

Amendment  159

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2d. The Digital Services Coordinator of each Member State, by means of national legislation, may request a very large online platform to cooperate with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in question in handling cases involving the removal of lawful content online that is taken down erroneously.

Amendment  160

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 12a
	General Risk Assessment and Mitigation Measures
	1. Providers of intermediary services shall identify, analyse and assess, at least once a year, the potential misuse or other risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. Such a general risk assessment shall be specific to each of their services and shall include at least risks related to the dissemination of illegal content through their services and any contents that might have a negative effect on potential recipients of the service.
	2. Providers of intermediary services shall wherever possible, attempt to put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures to the risk identified in line with applicable law and their terms and conditions.
	3. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon request, explain to the competent Digital Services Coordinator, how it undertook this risk assessment and what mitigation measures it undertook.
	4. Providers of intermediary services shall specially consider in the design, functioning and use of their services any actual, potential or foreseeable negative impact on fundamental rights, gender equality, and the protection of minors and people with disabilities.

Amendment  161

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:	1. Providers of intermediary services shall publish, at least once a year, clear, easily accessible, comprehensible, and detailed reports on any content moderation they engaged in during the relevant period. The reports shall be available in searchable archives. Those reports shall include, in particular, information on the following, as applicable:

Amendment  162

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed for taking the action specified in those orders;	(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised, where possible, by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed to inform the authority issuing the order of its receipt and the time for taking the action specified in those orders;

Amendment  163

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action;	(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, the number of notices submitted by trusted flaggers, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider;

Amendment  164

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.	(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, where identifiable, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.

Amendment  165

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that the identities, such as the trademark/logo or other characteristic traits of trade users providing goods or services on intermediary services are clearly visible alongside the goods or services provided.

Amendment  166

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Where made available to the public, the annual transparency reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall not include information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider's terms and conditions.

Amendment  167

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 13a
	Online interface design
	1. Providers of intermediary services shall refrain from subverting or impairing autonomous decision-making or free choice of a recipient of a service through the design, functioning or operation of online interfaces or a part thereof. In particular, providers shall refrain from:
	(a) according visual prominence to one option when asking the recipient of the service for consent or a decision;
	(b) repeatedly requesting consent to data processing or requesting a change to a setting or configuration of the service after the recipient of the service has already made its choice;
	(c) making the  making the refusal of consent to data processing more difficult or time-consuming to the recipient of the service than giving consent;
	(d) making the procedure of cancelling a service more difficult than signing up to it.
	2. A choice or decision made by the recipient of the service using an online interface that does not comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not constitute consent in  the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
	3. The Commission shall publish guidelines with a list of specific design patterns that qualify as subverting or impairing the autonomy, decision-making, or choice of the recipients of the service.

Amendment  168

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 13b
	Compliance with obligations for online marketplace
	Online marketplace shall ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation, in order to achieve the objectives of the relevant obligation in an effective manner.
	The non-compliance with the obligations laid down in the Regulation may affect the possibility for online marketplace of benefiting from the liability exemption as laid down in Article 5(1).

Amendment  169

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter III – Section 2 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Additional provisions applicable to providers of hosting services, including online platforms	Additional provisions applicable to providers of hosting services, including online platforms, and to providers of livestreaming platform services and of instant messaging services used for purposes other than private or non-commercial

Amendment  170

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user-friendly, and allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means.	1. Instant messaging services used for purposes other than private or non-commercial and providers of hosting services, including online platforms, shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content, or content that is in breach with their terms and conditions. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user-friendly, clearly visible on the hosting service interface, user-friendly and located close to the content in question allowing for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means in the language of the individual or entity submitting a notice.

Amendment  171

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:	2. Notices submitted under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent reviewer can identify the illegality or the breach of the content in question with the terms and conditions. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:

Amendment  172

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) an explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content;	(a) a sufficiently substantiated explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content, or content that is in breach with providers' terms and conditions;

Amendment  173

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;	(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, enabling the identification of the illegal content, or why the content such as the trademark/logo or other characteristic traits, is in breach with providers' terms and conditions;

Amendment  174

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.	3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 on the basis of which a diligent economic provider can identify the illegality of the content in question shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.

Amendment  175

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.	6. Instant messaging services used for purposes other than private or non-commercial and providers of hosting services, including online platforms without prejudice to Article 5 paragraph 1(b), shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a swift, non-discriminatory and objective manner and in any case within a maximum of 72 hours. Where decisions on the removal or deactivation of access to content are taken, providers of hosting services may take all measures necessary to prevent the same illegal content or equivalent illegal content from reappearing on their service. The application of this paragraph shall not lead to any general monitoring obligation and shall be subject to human review. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4. This means, in particular, key information on the procedure followed, the technology used, the criteria and reasoning underpinning the decision and the rationale behind any automated decision-making.

Amendment  176

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6a.  Providers of hosting service shall, without undue delay and in any case within the deadlines set out in Article 5 of the receipt of the notification at the latest, inform consumers who have purchased illegal products between the moment they have been uploaded on the provider’s website and the moment the listing has been taken down by the platform following a valid notice. Those measures shall not lead to any new profiling, tracking or identification obligation of providers.

Amendment  177

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6b. Where providers of hosting services, live streaming platform service and of instant messaging services used for purposes other than private or non-commercial have previously taken down, removed or deactivated access to illegal content as a result of a notice and a valid claim procedure which did not lead to a successful appeal, they may take all reasonable, proportional action to block, deactivate or permanently take down the illegal content or any identical content.

Amendment  178

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6c. The taking down, removal or deactivation of access as defined in paragraph 6 may be annulled by the following measures: a successful appeal, or a judicial ruling by a court with jurisdiction in a Member State, the General Court or the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Amendment  179

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 6 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	6d. This Article shall not apply to editorial content provided by a trader assuming editorial responsibility for that content and complying with rules which are in line with community and national law.

Amendment  180

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 19	Article 14a
Trusted flaggers	Trusted flaggers
1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay.	1. Online platforms and providers of hosting services shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are immediately processed and decided, without prejudice to the implementation of a complaint and redress mechanism.
2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entities, 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:	2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entities, 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, without prejudice to the implementation of a complaint and redress mechanism:
(a) it has particular expertise and competence for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content;	(a) it has particular expertise and competence that could be exercised in one or more Member States, for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content, as well as intentional manipulation and exploitation of the service in the sense of Article 26(1)(c);
(b) it represents collective interests and is independent from any online platform;	(b) it represents collective interests or as individual right holder and is independent from any online platform, law enforcement, or other government or relevant commercial entity;
(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner.	(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner, and in full respect of fundamental rights such as the freedom of expression and information, and it is independent;
	(ca) it publishes, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any notices submitted in accordance with Article 14 during the relevant period. The report shall list notices categorised by the identity of the hosting service provider, the type of alleged illegal or terms and conditions violating content concerned, and what action was taken by the provider. In addition, the reports shall identify relationships between the trusted flagger and any online platform, law enforcement, or other government or relevant commercial entity, and explain the means by which the trusted flagger maintains its independence.
	2a. The conditions set in paragraph 2 allow trusted flaggers’ notifications to be sufficient for immediate removal or disabling the content notified by them.
3. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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.	3. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission 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. This communication shall include the geographical scope within which the trusted flagger competence was recognised based on the approval of a particular Digital Services Coordinator and information on expertise and competence declared by the trusted flagger.
	3a. Member States may recognise entities that were awarded the status of trusted flaggers in another Member State as a trusted flagger on their own territory. Upon request by a Member State, trusted flaggers can be awarded the status of European trusted flagger by the Board, in accordance with Article 48(2). The Commission shall keep register of European trusted flaggers.
4. The Commission shall publish the information referred to in paragraph 3 in a publicly available database and keep the database updated.	4. The Commission shall publish the information referred to in paragraph 3 in a publicly available database and keep the database updated.
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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.	5. Where an online platform or a provider of hosting services has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated or incorrect notices, or notices violating recipients’ fundamental right or aiming at distorting competition, 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 Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.
6. The Digital Services Coordinator 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.	6. The Digital Services Coordinator 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 or a provider of hosting services pursuant to paragraph 5, that the entity no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 2. The Digital Services Coordinator can also take into account any evidence according to which the entity would have used its status to distort competition. 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.
7. The Commission, after consulting the Board, may issue guidance to assist online platforms and Digital Services Coordinators in the application of paragraphs 5 and 6.	7. The Commission, after consulting the Board, shall issue guidance to assist online platforms and Digital Services Coordinators in the application of paragraphs 2, 4a, 6 and 7.

(Article 19 is placed after Article 14 and is amended.)

Amendment  181

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove or disable access to specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing or disabling access to that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.	1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove, disable access to or otherwise restrict the visibility of specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or removing, disabling access to or reducing the visibility of that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access or the restriction of visibility, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.

Amendment  182

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. When the removing or disabling access to specific items of information is followed by the transmission of these specific items of information in accordance with Article 15a, the requirement to inform the recipient set out in paragraph 1 of this Article may be postponed by a period of six weeks in order to avoid interfere with potential ongoing criminal investigations. The period of six weeks can be renewed only following a motivated decision of the competent authority to which the specific items of information had been transmitted.

Amendment  183

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access;	(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, the disabling of access to, the restriction of the visibility of, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access or of the restriction of visibility;

Amendment  184

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Providers of hosting services shall publish the decisions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible database managed by the Commission. That information shall not include personal data.	4. Providers of hosting services shall publish the decisions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a database managed by the Commission which is accessible to national and European authorities. That information shall not include personal data.

Amendment  185

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC. In addition, those paragraphs shall not apply to enterprises that previously qualified for the status of a micro or small enterprise within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC during the twelve months following their loss of that status.

Amendment  186

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15a
	Preservation of content and related data, and mandatory transmission of specific items of information
	1.  Providers of hosting services shall store the illegal content which has been removed or access to which has been disabled as a result of content moderation, or of an order to act against a specific item of illegal content as referred to in Article 8, as well as any related data removed as a consequence of the removal of such illegal content, which are necessary for:
	(a)  administrative or judicial review or out-of-court dispute settlement against a decision to remove or disable access to illegal content and related date; or
	(b)  the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of criminal offences.
	2.  Illegal content referred to in this article means related to human trafficking and child pornography, as well as content that publicly inciting to violence directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin in accordance with Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA1a and Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1b.
	3.  Providers of hosting services shall store the illegal content and related data pursuant to in paragraph 1 for six months from the date of removal or disabling access to it. The illegal content shall, upon request from the competent authority or court, be stored for a further specified period only if and for as long as necessary for ongoing administrative or judicial review as referred to in paragraph 1, point (a).
	4.  Providers of hosting services shall ensure that the illegal content and related data stored pursuant to paragraph 1 are subject to appropriate technical and organisational safeguards. Those technical and organisational safeguards shall ensure that the illegal content and related data stored are accessed and processed only for the purposes referred to in paragraph 1 and shall ensure a high level of security of personal data concerned. Providers of hosting services shall review and update those safeguards where necessary.
	5.  Providers of hosting services shall transmit to the competent authorities of the Member States the illegal content which has been removed or access to which has been disabled, whether such a removing or disabling access to is a result of a voluntary content moderation or of a use of the notice and action mechanism referred to in Article 14. They shall transmit that illegal content under the following conditions:
	(a)  illegal content referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article; and
	(b)  the competent law enforcement authority to receive such illegal content is that of the Member State of the residence or establishment of the person who made the illegal content available, or, failing that, the law enforcement authority is that of the Member State in which the provider of hosting services is established or has its legal representative, or, failing that, the provider of hosting services shall inform Europol;
	(c)  when the provider of hosting services is a very large online platform in accordance with the Section 4 of Chapter III, it shall, when transmitting the illegal content, add a flag indicating that the illegal content involves a threat to the life or safety of persons.
	6.  Each Member State shall notify to the Commission the list of its competent law enforcement authorities for the purposes of paragraph 5.
	_______________
	1a Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (OJ L 328, 6.12.2008, p. 55).
	1b Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1).

Amendment  187

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15b
	Notification of suspicions of serious criminal offences
	1.  Where a provider of hosting services becomes aware of any information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or is likely to take place, it shall promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide all relevant information available.
	2.  Where provider of hosting services 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 shall inform Europol.
	3. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified.
	4. For the purpose of this Article, the Member State concerned shall be the Member State where the serious criminal offence is suspected to have taken place, to be taking place or to likely take place, or the Member State where the suspected offender resides or is located, or the Member State where the victim of the suspected serious criminal offence resides or is located.
	5. For the purpose of this Article, each Member State shall notify to the Commission the list of its competent law enforcement or judicial authorities.

Amendment  188

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 15c
	Principles for content management
	1. Content management shall be conducted in a fair, lawful and transparent manner. Content management practices shall be appropriate, proportionate to the type and volume of content, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which the content is managed. Content hosting platforms shall be accountable for ensuring that their content management practices are fair, transparent and proportionate.
	2. Users shall not be subjected to discriminatory practices, exploitation or exclusion, for the purposes of content moderation by the content hosting platforms, such as removal of user-generated content based on appearance, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, religion or belief, disability, age, pregnancy or upbringing of children, language or social class.
	3. Content hosting platforms shall provide the users with sufficient information on their content curation profiles and the individual criteria according to which content hosting platforms curate content for them, including information as to whether algorithms are used and their objectives.
	4. Content hosting platforms shall provide users with an appropriate degree of influence over the curation of content made visible to them, including the choice of opting out of content curation altogether. In particular, users shall not be subject to content curation without their freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous prior consent.

Amendment  189

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.	This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC and to online platforms that no longer qualify as micro or small enterprises, and that are not owned by entities having their establishment outside the Union..

Amendment  190

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall provide 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, 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:	1. Online platforms shall provide recipients of the service, as well as individuals or entities that have submitted a notice, 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, against the decision taken by the online platform not to act after having received a notice, and 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  191

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) decisions to remove or disable access to the information;	(a) decisions whether or not to remove, suspend the possibility of purchase or rental, disable access to or restrict the visibility of the information;

Amendment  192

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) decisions to suspend or terminate the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;	(b) decisions whether or not to suspend or terminate the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;

Amendment  193

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) decisions to suspend or terminate the recipients’ account.	(c) decisions whether or not to suspend or terminate the recipients’ account.

Amendment  194

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca)  decisions to restrict or not the ability to monetize content provided by the recipients.

Amendment  195

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cb) decisions of online marketplaces to suspend the provisions of their services to traders;

Amendment  196

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cc) decisions that adversely affect the recipient’s access to significant features of the platform’s regular services;

Amendment  197

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(cd) decisions not to act upon a notice;

Amendment  198

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ce) decisions whether or not to apply additional labels or additional information to content provided by the recipients.

Amendment  199

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. When the decision to remove or disable access to the information is followed by the transmission of this information in accordance with Article 15a, the period of at least six months as set out to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be considered to start from the day on which the recipient was informed in accordance with Article 15(2).

Amendment  200

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.	3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and non-arbitrary manner and without undue delay. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.

Amendment  201

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Online platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities.	4. Online platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants and the individual or bodies which submitted a referral linked to the complainant’s request of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities. The decision mentioned in this paragraph shall also include:
	– information on whether the decision referred to in paragraph 1 was taken as a result of human review;
	– in case the decision referred to in paragraph 1 is upheld, a detailed explanation on how the information to which the complaint relates to is in breach of the platform’s terms and conditions or why the online platform considers the information to be unlawful.

Amendment  202

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means.	5. Online platforms shall ensure that recipients of the service  may  contact a human interlocutor at the time of the submission of the complaint and that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means.

Amendment  203

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5a. Online platforms shall ensure that any relevant information in relation to decisions taken by the internal complaint-handling mechanism is available to recipients of the service for the purpose of seeking redress through an out-of-court dispute settlement body pursuant to Article 18 or before a court.

Amendment  204

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.	1. After internal complaint handling mechanisms are exhausted, recipients of the service individuals or entities that have submitted notices, addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.

Amendment  205

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient concerned to redress against the decision before a court in accordance with the applicable law.	The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient concerned to redress against the decision before a court in accordance with the applicable law. Judicial redress against a decision by an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall be directed against the online platform, not the settlement body.

Amendment  206

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where a recipient seeks a resolved to multiple complaints, either party may request that the out-of-court dispute settlement body treats and resolves these complaints in a single dispute decision.

Amendment  207

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, at the request of that body, certify the body, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:	2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall certify the body, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:

Amendment  208

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms and recipients of the service provided by the online platforms;	(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms and recipients of the service provided by the online platforms, including aspects such as financial resources and personnel, and is legally distinct from and functionally independent of the government of the Member State or any other public or private body as well as of individuals or entities that have submitted notices;

Amendment  209

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible through electronic communication technology;	(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities, through electronic communication technology;

Amendment  210

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;	(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient, accessible for persons with disabilities and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;

Amendment  211

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure.	(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure which are easily and publicly accessible.

Amendment  212

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates and the official language or languages of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in points (b) and (d) of the first subparagraph, respectively.	The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates and the official language or languages of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in points (b) and (d) of the first subparagraph, respectively.
	Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall conclude dispute resolution proceedings within a reasonable period of time.

Amendment  213

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
The fees charged by the body for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs thereof.	The fees charged by the body for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs thereof. Out-of-court dispute settlement procedures shall preferably be free of charge for the recipient.

Amendment  214

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make the fees, or the mechanisms used to determine the fees, known to the recipient of the services and the online platform concerned before engaging in the dispute settlement.	Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make information on the fees, or the mechanisms used to determine the fees, publicly available.

Amendment  215

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. Decisions reached by an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall not be disputable by another out-of-court dispute settlement body and the resolution of a particular dispute may only be discussed in one out-of-court dispute settlement body.

Amendment  216

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 19a
	Accessibility requirements for online platforms
	1. Providers of online platforms which offer services in the Union shall ensure that they design and provide services in accordance with the accessibility requirements set out in Section III, Section IV, Section VI, and Section VII of Annex I to Directive (EU) 2019/882.
	2. Providers of online platforms shall prepare the necessary information in accordance with Annex V to Directive (EU) 2019/882 as well as information, forms and measures provided pursuant to this Regulation and shall explain how the services meet the applicable accessibility requirements. The information shall be made available to the public including in a manner which is accessible to persons with disabilities. Providers of online platforms shall keep that information for as long as the service is in operation.
	3. Providers of online platforms which offer services in the Union shall ensure that procedures are in place so that the provision of services remains in conformity with the applicable accessibility requirements. Changes in the characteristics of the provision of the service, changes in applicable accessibility requirements and changes in the harmonised standards or in technical specifications by reference to which a service is declared to meet the accessibility requirements shall be adequately taken into account by the provider of intermediary services.
	4. In the case of non-conformity, providers of online platforms shall take the corrective measures necessary to bring the service into conformity with the applicable accessibility requirements.
	5. Provider of online platforms shall, further to a reasoned request from a competent authority, provide it with all information necessary to demonstrate the conformity of the service with the applicable accessibility requirements. They shall cooperate with that authority, at the request of that authority, on any action taken to bring the service into compliance with those requirements.
	6. Online platforms which are in conformity with harmonised standards or parts thereof the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be presumed to be in conformity with the accessibility requirements of this Regulation in so far as those standards or parts thereof cover those requirements.
	7. Online platforms which are inconformity with the technical specifications or parts thereof adopted for the Directive (EU) 2019/882 shall be presumed to be in conformity with the accessibility requirements of this Regulation in so far as those technical specifications or parts thereof cover those requirements.

Amendment  217

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content.	1. Providers of hosting services and online platforms shall, after having issued a prior warning, enable, suspend, for a specified period of time, or terminate the provision of their services to recipients of the service that repeatedly provide illegal content. The online platform may request support from the Digital Service Coordinator to establish the frequency for which account suspension is deemed necessary and to set the duration of the suspension.

Amendment  218

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Online marketplaces shall publish the information on traders suspended pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article gathered in accordance with Article 22(1) in the database as referred to in Article 15(4). When the suspension expires, the data should be deleted from that database.

Amendment  219

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequently submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded.	2. Providers of hosting services and online platforms shall, after having issued at least three prior warnings, suspend, for a specified period of time, or terminate the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and internal complaints-handling systems referred to in Articles 14 and 17, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequently submit notices or complaints that are manifestly unfounded.

Amendment  220

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. Online platforms shall assess, on a case-by-case basis and in a timely, diligent and objective manner, whether a recipient, individual, entity or complainant engages in the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances apparent from the information available to the online platform. Those circumstances shall include at least the following:	3. Providers of hosting services and online platforms shall assess, on a case-by-case basis and in a timely, diligent and objective manner, whether a recipient, individual, entity or complainant engages in the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances apparent from the information available to them. Those circumstances shall include at least the following:

Amendment  221

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) the absolute numbers of items of manifestly illegal content or manifestly unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;	(a) the absolute numbers of items of illegal content or unfounded notices or complaints, submitted in the past year;

Amendment  222

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(d) the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant.	(d) where identifiable, the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant.

Amendment  223

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. Suspensions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be declared permanent where:
	(a) compelling reasons of law or public policy, including ongoing criminal investigations, justify avoiding or postponing notice to the recipient;
	(b) the items removed were components of high-volume campaigns to deceive users or manipulate platform content moderation efforts; or
	(c) the items removed were related to content covered by Directive 2011/93/EU or Directive (EU) 2017/541.

Amendment  224

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3b. The assessment must be carried out by qualified staff provided with dedicated training on the applicable legal framework.

Amendment  225

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3c. Without prejudice to Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, providers of hosting services shall do all in their power to ensure that users which have been suspended from the service cannot use it again until such time as the suspension is lifted.
	Where an online platform stops providing its services to a trade user, it shall provide that user, at least 15 days before the termination comes into force, with the reasons for its decision and shall inform it of the possibility to challenge the decision under Article 17.

Amendment  226

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.	4. Providers of hosting services and online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.

Amendment  227

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – second subparagraph

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
For the purpose of this Article, the Member State concerned shall be the Member State where the offence is suspected to have taken place, be taking place and likely to take place, or the Member State where the suspected offender resides or is located, or the Member State where the victim of the suspected offence resides or is located.	deleted

Amendment  228

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. Unless instructed otherwise by the informed authority, the provider shall remove or disable the content. It shall store all content and related data for at least six months.

Amendment  229

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified.

Amendment  230

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – title

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Traceability of traders	Traceability of traders on online marketplaces

Amendment  231

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtained the following information:	1. The online marketplace shall ensure that professional traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online marketplace has obtained the following information:

Amendment  232

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) the bank account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;	(c) the payment account details of the trader;

Amendment  233

Proposal for a regulation