keyboard_tab Digital Service Act 2022/2065 EN
BG CS DA DE EL EN ES ET FI FR GA HR HU IT LV LT MT NL PL PT RO SK SL SV print pdf
- 2 Art. 2 Scope
- 1 Art. 4 ‘Mere conduit’
- 1 Art. 16 Notice and action mechanisms
- 6 Art. 18 Notification of suspicions of criminal offences
- 1 Art. 21 Out-of-court dispute settlement
- 1 Art. 22 Trusted flaggers
- 1 Art. 28 Online protection of minors
- 2 Art. 35 Mitigation of risks
- 2 Art. 40 Data access and scrutiny
- 1 Art. 42 Transparency reporting obligations
- 1 Art. 48 Crisis protocols
- 1 Art. 51 Powers of Digital Services Coordinators
- 1 Art. 68 Power to take interviews and statements
CHAPTER I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER II
LIABILITY OF PROVIDERS OF INTERMEDIARY SERVICES
CHAPTER III
DUE DILIGENCE OBLIGATIONS FOR A TRANSPARENT AND SAFE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT
SECTION 1
Provisions applicable to all providers of intermediary services
SECTION 2
Additional provisions applicable to providers of hosting services, including online platforms
SECTION 3
Additional provisions applicable to providers of online platforms
SECTION 4
Additional provisions applicable to providers of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders
SECTION 5
Additional obligations for providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines to manage systemic risks
SECTION 6
Other provisions concerning due diligence obligations
CHAPTER IV
IMPLEMENTATION, COOPERATION, PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT
SECTION 1
Competent authorities and national Digital Services Coordinators
SECTION 2
Competences, coordinated investigation and consistency mechanisms
SECTION 3
European Board for Digital Services
SECTION 4
Supervision, investigation, enforcement and monitoring in respect of providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines
SECTION 5
Common provisions on enforcement
SECTION 6
Delegated and implementing acts
CHAPTER V
FINAL PROVISIONS
- information society service
- recipient of the service
- consumer
- to offer services in the Union
- substantial connection to the Union
- trader
- intermediary service
- mere conduit
- caching
- hosting
- illegal content
- online platform
- online search engine
- dissemination to the public
- distance contract
- online interface
- Digital Services Coordinator of establishment
- Digital Services Coordinator of destination
- active recipient of an online platform
- active recipient of an online search engine
- advertisement
- recommender system
- content moderation
- terms and conditions
- persons with disabilities
- commercial communication
- turnover
- Mere conduit
- Caching
- shall 143
- dispute 81
- settlement 71
- information 68
- services 57
- out-of-court 55
- very 46
- large 46
- online_platforms 45
- digital 44
- paragraph 44
- referred 43
- including 42
- providers 42
- body 41
- provider 38
- they 36
- have 35
- service 34
- request 33
- coordinator 31
- which 30
- commission 29
- data 29
- measures 28
- bodies 28
- access 27
- pursuant 25
- accordance 25
- regulation 24
- certified 24
- period 22
- crisis 21
- the 21
- place 21
- online_search_engines 20
- particular 20
- application 20
- infringement 19
- subparagraph 19
- entity 19
- recipients 19
- concerned 19
- coordinators 18
- in article 18
- union 18
- without 17
- applicable 17
- following 16
- necessary 16
Article 21
Out-of-court dispute settlement
1. Recipients of the service, including individuals or entities that have submitted notices, addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 20(1) shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that have not been resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article.
Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that information about the possibility for recipients of the service to have access to an out-of-court dispute settlement, as referred to in the first subparagraph, is easily accessible on their online_interface, clear and user-friendly.
The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient_of_the_service concerned to initiate, at any stage, proceedings to contest those decisions by the providers of online_platforms before a court in accordance with the applicable law.
2. Both parties shall engage, in good faith, with the selected certified out-of-court dispute settlement body with a view to resolving the dispute.
Providers of online_platforms may refuse to engage with such out-of-court dispute settlement body if a dispute has already been resolved concerning the same information and the same grounds of alleged illegality or incompatibility of content.
The certified out-of-court dispute settlement body shall not have the power to impose a binding settlement of the dispute on the parties.
3. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, for a maximum period of five years, which may be renewed, certify the body, at its request, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:
(a) | it is impartial and independent, including financially independent, of providers of online_platforms and of recipients of the service provided by providers of online_platforms, including of individuals or entities that have submitted notices; |
(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_platform, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute; |
(c) | its members are remunerated in a way that is not linked to the outcome of the procedure; |
(d) | the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers is easily accessible, through electronic communications technology and provides for the possibility to initiate the dispute settlement and to submit the requisite supporting documents online; |
(e) | it is capable of settling disputes in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one of the official languages of the institutions of the Union; |
(f) | the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure that are easily and publicly accessible, and that comply with applicable law, including this Article. |
The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate:
(a) | the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates, as referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph; and |
(b) | the official language or languages of the institutions of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in point (e) of the first subparagraph. |
4. Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall report to the Digital Services Coordinator that certified them, on an annual basis, on their functioning, specifying at least the number of disputes they received, the information about the outcomes of those disputes, the average time taken to resolve them and any shortcomings or difficulties encountered. They shall provide additional information at the request of that Digital Services Coordinator.
Digital Services Coordinators shall, every two years, draw up a report on the functioning of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they certified. That report shall in particular:
(a) | list the number of disputes that each certified out-of-court dispute settlement body has received annually; |
(b) | indicate the outcomes of the procedures brought before those bodies and the average time taken to resolve the disputes; |
(c) | identify and explain any systematic or sectoral shortcomings or difficulties encountered in relation to the functioning of those bodies; |
(d) | identify best practices concerning that functioning; |
(e) | make recommendations as to how to improve that functioning, where appropriate. |
Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make their decisions available to the parties within a reasonable period of time and no later than 90 calendar days after the receipt of the complaint. In the case of highly complex disputes, the certified out-of-court dispute settlement body may, at its own discretion, extend the 90 calendar day period for an additional period that shall not exceed 90 days, resulting in a maximum total duration of 180 days.
5. If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity that has submitted a notice, the provider of the online_platform shall bear all the fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body, and shall reimburse that recipient, including the individual or entity, for any other reasonable expenses that it has paid in relation to the dispute settlement. If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the provider of the online_platform, the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity, shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the provider of the online_platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement, unless the out-of-court dispute settlement body finds that that recipient manifestly acted in bad faith.
The fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body to the providers of online_platforms for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs incurred by the body. For recipients of the service, the dispute settlement shall be available free of charge or at a nominal fee.
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_service, including to the individuals or entities that have submitted a notice, and to the provider of the online_platform concerned, before engaging in the dispute settlement.
6. Member States may establish out-of-court dispute settlement bodies for the purposes of paragraph 1 or support the activities of some or all out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3.
Member States shall ensure that any of their activities undertaken under the first subparagraph do not affect the ability of their Digital Services Coordinators to certify the bodies concerned in accordance with paragraph 3.
7. A Digital Services Coordinator that has certified an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall revoke that certification if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis of the information received by third parties, that the out-of-court dispute settlement body no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 3. Before revoking that certification, the Digital Services Coordinator shall afford that body an opportunity to react to the findings of its investigation and its intention to revoke the out-of-court dispute settlement body’s certification.
8. Digital Services Coordinators shall notify to the Commission the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3, including where applicable the specifications referred to in the second subparagraph of that paragraph, as well as the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies the certification of which they have revoked. The Commission shall publish a list of those bodies, including those specifications, on a dedicated website that is easily accessible, and keep it up to date.
9. This Article is without prejudice to Directive 2013/11/EU and alternative dispute resolution procedures and entities for consumers established under that Directive.
Article 2
Scope
1. This Regulation shall apply to intermediary_services offered to recipients of the service that have their place of establishment or are located in the Union, irrespective of where the providers of those intermediary_services have their place of establishment.
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 shall not affect the application of Directive 2000/31/EC.
4. This Regulation is without prejudice to the rules laid down by other Union legal acts regulating other aspects of the provision of intermediary_services in the internal market or specifying and complementing this Regulation, in particular, the following:
(a) | Directive 2010/13/EU; |
(b) | Union law on copyright and related rights; |
(c) | Regulation (EU) 2021/784; |
(d) | Regulation (EU) 2019/1148; |
(e) | Regulation (EU) 2019/1150; |
(f) | Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulations (EU) 2017/2394 and (EU) 2019/1020 and Directives 2001/95/EC and 2013/11/EU; |
(g) | Union law on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC; |
(h) | Union law in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters, in particular Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 or any Union legal act laying down the rules on law applicable to contractual and non-contractual obligations; |
(i) | Union law in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, in particular a Regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters; |
(j) | a Directive laying down harmonised rules on the appointment of legal representatives for the purpose of gathering evidence in criminal proceedings. |
Article 4
‘ Mere_conduit’
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 or accessed, on condition that the provider:
(a) | does not initiate the transmission; |
(b) | does not select the receiver of the transmission; and |
(c) | does not select or modify the information contained in the transmission. |
2. The acts of transmission and of provision of access referred to in paragraph 1 shall include the automatic, intermediate and transient storage of the information transmitted in so far as this takes place for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission in the communication network, and provided that the information is not stored for any period longer than is reasonably necessary for the transmission.
3. This Article shall not affect the possibility for a judicial or administrative authority, in accordance with a Member State’s legal system, to require the service provider to terminate or prevent an infringement.
Article 16
Notice and action mechanisms
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 and user-friendly, and shall allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means.
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 of hosting services shall take the necessary measures to enable and to facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:
(a) | a sufficiently substantiated explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity alleges the information in question to be illegal_content; |
(b) | a clear indication of the exact electronic location of that information, such as the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal_content adapted to the type of content and to the specific type of hosting service; |
(c) | the name and email address of the individual or entity submitting the notice, except in the case of information considered to involve one of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 of Directive 2011/93/EU; |
(d) | a statement confirming the bona fide belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are accurate and complete. |
3. Notices referred to in this Article shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 6 in respect of the specific item of information concerned where they allow a diligent provider of hosting services to identify the illegality of the relevant activity or information without a detailed legal examination.
4. Where the notice contains the electronic contact information 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.
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 possibilities for redress in respect of that decision.
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-arbitrary 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 5.
Article 18
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 criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of a person or 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 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 where its legal representative resides or is established or inform Europol, or both.
For the purpose of this Article, the Member State concerned shall be the Member State in which the offence is suspected to have taken place, to be taking place or to be 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.
SECTION 3
Additional provisions applicable to providers of online_platforms
Article 21
Out-of-court dispute settlement
1. Recipients of the service, including individuals or entities that have submitted notices, addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 20(1) shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that have not been resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article.
Providers of online_platforms shall ensure that information about the possibility for recipients of the service to have access to an out-of-court dispute settlement, as referred to in the first subparagraph, is easily accessible on their online_interface, clear and user-friendly.
The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient_of_the_service concerned to initiate, at any stage, proceedings to contest those decisions by the providers of online_platforms before a court in accordance with the applicable law.
2. Both parties shall engage, in good faith, with the selected certified out-of-court dispute settlement body with a view to resolving the dispute.
Providers of online_platforms may refuse to engage with such out-of-court dispute settlement body if a dispute has already been resolved concerning the same information and the same grounds of alleged illegality or incompatibility of content.
The certified out-of-court dispute settlement body shall not have the power to impose a binding settlement of the dispute on the parties.
3. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, for a maximum period of five years, which may be renewed, certify the body, at its request, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:
(a) | it is impartial and independent, including financially independent, of providers of online_platforms and of recipients of the service provided by providers of online_platforms, including of individuals or entities that have submitted notices; |
(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_platform, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute; |
(c) | its members are remunerated in a way that is not linked to the outcome of the procedure; |
(d) | the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers is easily accessible, through electronic communications technology and provides for the possibility to initiate the dispute settlement and to submit the requisite supporting documents online; |
(e) | it is capable of settling disputes in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one of the official languages of the institutions of the Union; |
(f) | the out-of-court dispute settlement that it offers takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure that are easily and publicly accessible, and that comply with applicable law, including this Article. |
The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate:
(a) | the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates, as referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph; and |
(b) | the official language or languages of the institutions of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in point (e) of the first subparagraph. |
4. Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall report to the Digital Services Coordinator that certified them, on an annual basis, on their functioning, specifying at least the number of disputes they received, the information about the outcomes of those disputes, the average time taken to resolve them and any shortcomings or difficulties encountered. They shall provide additional information at the request of that Digital Services Coordinator.
Digital Services Coordinators shall, every two years, draw up a report on the functioning of the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they certified. That report shall in particular:
(a) | list the number of disputes that each certified out-of-court dispute settlement body has received annually; |
(b) | indicate the outcomes of the procedures brought before those bodies and the average time taken to resolve the disputes; |
(c) | identify and explain any systematic or sectoral shortcomings or difficulties encountered in relation to the functioning of those bodies; |
(d) | identify best practices concerning that functioning; |
(e) | make recommendations as to how to improve that functioning, where appropriate. |
Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make their decisions available to the parties within a reasonable period of time and no later than 90 calendar days after the receipt of the complaint. In the case of highly complex disputes, the certified out-of-court dispute settlement body may, at its own discretion, extend the 90 calendar day period for an additional period that shall not exceed 90 days, resulting in a maximum total duration of 180 days.
5. If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity that has submitted a notice, the provider of the online_platform shall bear all the fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body, and shall reimburse that recipient, including the individual or entity, for any other reasonable expenses that it has paid in relation to the dispute settlement. If the out-of-court dispute settlement body decides the dispute in favour of the provider of the online_platform, the recipient_of_the_service, including the individual or entity, shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the provider of the online_platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement, unless the out-of-court dispute settlement body finds that that recipient manifestly acted in bad faith.
The fees charged by the out-of-court dispute settlement body to the providers of online_platforms for the dispute settlement shall be reasonable and shall in any event not exceed the costs incurred by the body. For recipients of the service, the dispute settlement shall be available free of charge or at a nominal fee.
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_service, including to the individuals or entities that have submitted a notice, and to the provider of the online_platform concerned, before engaging in the dispute settlement.
6. Member States may establish out-of-court dispute settlement bodies for the purposes of paragraph 1 or support the activities of some or all out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3.
Member States shall ensure that any of their activities undertaken under the first subparagraph do not affect the ability of their Digital Services Coordinators to certify the bodies concerned in accordance with paragraph 3.
7. A Digital Services Coordinator that has certified an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall revoke that certification if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis of the information received by third parties, that the out-of-court dispute settlement body no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 3. Before revoking that certification, the Digital Services Coordinator shall afford that body an opportunity to react to the findings of its investigation and its intention to revoke the out-of-court dispute settlement body’s certification.
8. Digital Services Coordinators shall notify to the Commission the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies that they have certified in accordance with paragraph 3, including where applicable the specifications referred to in the second subparagraph of that paragraph, as well as the out-of-court dispute settlement bodies the certification of which they have revoked. The Commission shall publish a list of those bodies, including those specifications, on a dedicated website that is easily accessible, and keep it up to date.
9. This Article is without prejudice to Directive 2013/11/EU and alternative dispute resolution procedures and entities for consumers established under that Directive.
Article 22
Trusted flaggers
1. Providers of 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 16, are given priority and are processed and decided upon without undue delay.
2. The status of ‘trusted flagger’ 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, to an applicant that has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:
(a) | it has particular expertise and competence for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal_content; |
(b) | it is independent from any provider of online_platforms; |
(c) | it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices diligently, accurately and objectively. |
3. Trusted flaggers shall publish, at least once a year easily comprehensible and detailed reports on notices submitted in accordance with Article 16 during the relevant period. The report shall list at least the number of notices categorised by:
(a) | the identity of the provider of hosting services, |
(b) | the type of allegedly illegal_content notified, |
(c) | the action taken by the provider. |
Those reports shall include an explanation of the procedures in place to ensure that the trusted flagger retains its independence.
Trusted flaggers shall send those reports to the awarding Digital Services Coordinator, and shall make them publicly available. The information in those reports shall not contain personal data.
4. Digital Services Coordinators shall communicate to the Commission and the Board the names, addresses and email addresses of the entities to which they have awarded the status of the trusted flagger in accordance with paragraph 2 or whose trusted flagger status they have suspended in accordance with paragraph 6 or revoked in accordance with paragraph 7.
5. The Commission shall publish the information referred to in paragraph 4 in a publicly available database, in an easily accessible and machine-readable format, and shall keep the database up to date.
6. Where a provider of online_platforms has information indicating that a trusted flagger has submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise, inaccurate or inadequately substantiated notices through the mechanisms referred to in Article 16, including information gathered in connection to the processing of complaints through the internal complaint-handling systems referred to in Article 20(4), 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 provider of 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. That investigation shall be carried out without undue delay.
7. 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 a provider of online_platforms pursuant to paragraph 6, 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.
8. The Commission, after consulting the Board, shall, where necessary, issue guidelines to assist providers of online_platforms and Digital Services Coordinators in the application of paragraphs 2, 6 and 7.
Article 28
Online protection of minors
1. Providers of online_platforms accessible to minors shall put in place appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety, and security of minors, on their service.
2. Providers of online_platform shall not present advertisements on their interface based on profiling as defined in Article 4, point (4), of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 using personal data of the recipient_of_the_service when they are aware with reasonable certainty that the recipient_of_the_service is a minor.
3. Compliance with the obligations set out in this Article shall not oblige providers of online_platforms to process additional personal data in order to assess whether the recipient_of_the_service is a minor.
4. The Commission, after consulting the Board, may issue guidelines to assist providers of online_platforms in the application of paragraph 1.
SECTION 4
Additional provisions applicable to providers of online_platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance_contracts with traders
Article 35
Mitigation of risks
1. Providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 34, with particular consideration to the impacts of such measures on fundamental rights. Such measures may include, where applicable:
(a) | adapting the design, features or functioning of their services, including their online_interfaces; |
(b) | adapting their terms_and_conditions and their enforcement; |
(c) | adapting content_moderation processes, including the speed and quality of processing notices related to specific types of illegal_content and, where appropriate, the expeditious removal of, or the disabling of access to, the content notified, in particular in respect of illegal hate speech or cyber violence, as well as adapting any relevant decision-making processes and dedicated resources for content_moderation; |
(d) | testing and adapting their algorithmic systems, including their recommender_systems; |
(e) | adapting their advertising systems and adopting targeted measures aimed at limiting or adjusting the presentation of advertisements in association with the service they provide; |
(f) | reinforcing the internal processes, resources, testing, documentation, or supervision of any of their activities in particular as regards detection of systemic risk; |
(g) | initiating or adjusting cooperation with trusted flaggers in accordance with Article 22 and the implementation of the decisions of out-of-court dispute settlement bodies pursuant to Article 21; |
(h) | initiating or adjusting cooperation with other providers of online_platforms or of online_search_engines through the codes of conduct and the crisis protocols referred to in Articles 45 and 48 respectively; |
(i) | taking awareness-raising measures and adapting their online_interface in order to give recipients of the service more information; |
(j) | taking targeted measures to protect the rights of the child, including age verification and parental control tools, tools aimed at helping minors signal abuse or obtain support, as appropriate; |
(k) | ensuring that an item of information, whether it constitutes a generated or manipulated image, audio or video that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful is distinguishable through prominent markings when presented on their online_interfaces, and, in addition, providing an easy to use functionality which enables recipients of the service to indicate such information. |
2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year. The reports shall include the following:
(a) | identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic risks reported by providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Articles 39, 40 and 42; |
(b) | best practices for providers of very large online_platforms and of very large online_search_engines to mitigate the systemic risks identified. |
Those reports shall present systemic risks broken down by the Member States in which they occurred and in the Union as a whole, as applicable.
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue 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.
Article 40
Data access and scrutiny
1. Providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall provide the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment or the Commission, at their reasoned request and within a reasonable period specified in that request, access to data that are necessary to monitor and assess compliance with this Regulation.
2. Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission shall use the data accessed pursuant to paragraph 1 only for the purpose of monitoring and assessing compliance with this Regulation and shall take due account of the rights and interests of the providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of personal data, the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, and maintaining the security of their service.
3. For the purposes of paragraph 1, providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall, at the request of either the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment or of the Commission, explain the design, the logic, the functioning and the testing of their algorithmic systems, including their recommender_systems.
4. Upon a reasoned request from the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment, providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraph 8 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the detection, identification and understanding of systemic risks in the Union, as set out pursuant to Article 34(1), and to the assessment of the adequacy, efficiency and impacts of the risk mitigation measures pursuant to Article 35.
5. Within 15 days following receipt of a request as referred to in paragraph 4, providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines may request the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment, to amend the request, where they consider that they are unable to give access to the data requested because one of following two reasons:
(a) | they do not have access to the data; |
(b) | giving access to the data will lead to significant vulnerabilities in the security of their service or the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets. |
6. Requests for amendment pursuant to paragraph 5 shall contain proposals for one or more alternative means through which access may be provided to the requested data or other data which are appropriate and sufficient for the purpose of the request.
The Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment shall decide on the request for amendment within 15 days and communicate to the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine its decision and, where relevant, the amended request and the new period to comply with the request.
7. Providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall facilitate and provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 4 through appropriate interfaces specified in the request, including online databases or application programming interfaces.
8. Upon a duly substantiated application from researchers, the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment shall grant such researchers the status of ‘vetted researchers’ for the specific research referred to in the application and issue a reasoned request for data access to a provider of very large online_platform or of very large online_search_engine a pursuant to paragraph 4, where the researchers demonstrate that they meet all of the following conditions:
(a) | they are affiliated to a research organisation as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2019/790; |
(b) | they are independent from commercial interests; |
(c) | their application discloses the funding of the research; |
(d) | they are capable of fulfilling the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request and to protect personal data, and they describe in their request the appropriate technical and organisational measures that they have put in place to this end; |
(e) | their application demonstrates that their access to the data and the time frames requested are necessary for, and proportionate to, the purposes of their research, and that the expected results of that research will contribute to the purposes laid down in paragraph 4; |
(f) | the planned research activities will be carried out for the purposes laid down in paragraph 4; |
(g) | they have committed themselves to making their research results publicly available free of charge, within a reasonable period after the completion of the research, subject to the rights and interests of the recipients of the service concerned, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. |
Upon receipt of the application pursuant to this paragraph, the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment shall inform the Commission and the Board.
9. Researchers may also submit their application to the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of the research organisation to which they are affiliated. Upon receipt of the application pursuant to this paragraph the Digital Services Coordinator shall conduct an initial assessment as to whether the respective researchers meet all of the conditions set out in paragraph 8. The respective Digital Services Coordinator shall subsequently send the application, together with the supporting documents submitted by the respective researchers and the initial assessment, to the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment. The Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment shall take a decision whether to award a researcher the status of ‘vetted researcher’ without undue delay.
While taking due account of the initial assessment provided, the final decision to award a researcher the status of ‘vetted researcher’ lies within the competence of Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment, pursuant to paragraph 8.
10. The Digital Services Coordinator that awarded the status of vetted researcher and issued the reasoned request for data access to the providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines in favour of a vetted researcher shall issue a decision terminating the access if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis of information received from third parties, that the vetted researcher no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 8, and shall inform the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned of the decision. Before terminating the access, the Digital Services Coordinator shall allow the vetted researcher to react to the findings of its investigation and to its intention to terminate the access.
11. Digital Services Coordinators of establishment shall communicate to the Board the names and contact information of the natural persons or entities to which they have awarded the status of ‘vetted researcher’ in accordance with paragraph 8, as well as the purpose of the research in respect of which the application was made or, where they have terminated the access to the data in accordance with paragraph 10, communicate that information to the Board.
12. Providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall give access without undue delay to data, including, where technically possible, to real-time data, provided that the data is publicly accessible in their online_interface by researchers, including those affiliated to not for profit bodies, organisations and associations, who comply with the conditions set out in paragraph 8, points (b), (c), (d) and (e), and who use the data solely for performing research that contributes to the detection, identification and understanding of systemic risks in the Union pursuant to Article 34(1).
13. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, adopt delegated acts supplementing this Regulation by laying down the technical conditions under which providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 4 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 researchers can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, as well as relevant objective indicators, procedures and, where necessary, independent advisory mechanisms in support of sharing of data, taking into account the rights and interests of the providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, and maintaining the security of their service.
Article 42
Transparency reporting obligations
1. Providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall publish the reports referred to in Article 15 at the latest by two months from the date of application referred to in Article 33(6), second subparagraph, and thereafter at least every six months.
2. The reports referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article published by providers of very large online_platforms shall, in addition to the information referred to in Article 15 and Article 24(1), specify:
(a) | the human resources that the provider of very large online_platforms dedicates to content_moderation in respect of the service offered in the Union, broken down by each applicable official language of the Member States, including for compliance with the obligations set out in Articles 16 and 22, as well as for compliance with the obligations set out in Article 20; |
(b) | the qualifications and linguistic expertise of the persons carrying out the activities referred to in point (a), as well as the training and support given to such staff; |
(c) | the indicators of accuracy and related information referred to in Article 15(1), point (e), broken down by each official language of the Member States. |
The reports shall be published in at least one of the official languages of the Member States.
3. In addition to the information referred to in Articles 24(2), the providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall include in the reports referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article the information on the average monthly recipients of the service for each Member State.
4. Providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines shall transmit to the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment and the Commission, without undue delay upon completion, and make publicly available at the latest three months after the receipt of each audit report pursuant to Article 37(4):
(a) | a report setting out the results of the risk assessment pursuant to Article 34; |
(b) | the specific mitigation measures put in place pursuant to Article 35(1); |
(c) | the audit report provided for in Article 37(4); |
(d) | the audit implementation report provided for in Article 37(6); |
(e) | where applicable, information about the consultations conducted by the provider in support of the risk assessments and design of the risk mitigation measures. |
5. Where a provider of very large online_platform or of very large online_search_engine considers that the publication of information pursuant to paragraph 4 might result in the disclosure of confidential information of that provider or of the recipients of the service, cause significant vulnerabilities for the security of its service, undermine public security or harm recipients, the provider may remove such information from the publicly available reports. In that case, the provider 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 publicly available reports.
Article 48
Crisis protocols
1. The Board may recommend that the Commission initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of voluntary crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations. Those situations shall be strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health.
2. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the providers of very large online_platforms, of very large online_search_engines and, where appropriate, the providers of other online_platforms or of other online_search_engines, to participate in the drawing up, testing and application of those crisis protocols. The Commission shall aim to ensure that those crisis protocols include one or more of the following measures:
(a) | prominently displaying information on the crisis situation provided by Member States’ authorities or at Union level, or, depending on the context of the crisis, by other relevant reliable bodies; |
(b) | ensuring that the provider of intermediary_services designates a specific point of contact for crisis management; where relevant, this may be the electronic point of contact referred to in Article 11 or, in the case of providers of very large online_platforms or of very large online_search_engines, the compliance officer referred to in Article 41; |
(c) | where applicable, adapt the resources dedicated to compliance with the obligations set out in Articles 16, 20, 22, 23 and 35 to the needs arising from the crisis situation. |
3. The Commission shall, as appropriate, involve Member States’ authorities, and may also involve Union bodies, offices and agencies in drawing up, testing and supervising the application of the crisis protocols. The Commission may, where necessary and appropriate, also involve civil society organisations or other relevant organisations in drawing up the crisis protocols.
4. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the crisis protocols set out clearly all of the following:
(a) | the specific parameters to determine what constitutes the specific extraordinary circumstance the crisis protocol seeks to address and the objectives it pursues; |
(b) | the role of each participant and the measures they are to put in place in preparation and once the crisis protocol has been activated; |
(c) | a clear procedure for determining when the crisis protocol is to be activated; |
(d) | a clear procedure for determining the period during which the measures to be taken once the crisis protocol has been activated are to be taken, which is strictly limited to what is necessary for addressing the specific extraordinary circumstances concerned; |
(e) | safeguards to address any negative effects on the exercise of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, in particular the freedom of expression and information and the right to non-discrimination; |
(f) | a process to publicly report on any measures taken, their duration and their outcomes, upon the termination of the crisis situation. |
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 paragraph 4, point (e), it shall request the participants to revise the crisis protocol, including by taking additional measures.
CHAPTER IV
IMPLEMENTATION, COOPERATION, PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT
SECTION 1
Competent authorities and national Digital Services Coordinators
Article 51
Powers of Digital Services Coordinators
1. Where needed in order to carry out their tasks under this Regulation, Digital Services Coordinators shall have the following powers of investigation, in respect of conduct by providers of intermediary_services falling within the competence of their Member State:
(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 Article 37 and Article 75(2), to provide such information without undue delay; |
(b) | the power to carry out, or to request a judicial authority in their Member State to order, inspections of any premises that those providers or those persons use for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession, or to request other public authorities to do so, in order to examine, seize, take or obtain copies of information relating to a suspected infringement in any form, irrespective of the storage medium; |
(c) | the power to ask any member of staff or representative of those providers or those persons to give explanations in respect of any information relating to a suspected infringement and to record the answers with their consent by any technical means. |
2. Where needed for carrying out their tasks under this Regulation, Digital Services Coordinators shall have the following enforcement powers, in respect of providers of intermediary_services falling within the competence of their Member State:
(a) | the power to accept the commitments offered by those providers in relation to their compliance with this Regulation and to make those commitments binding; |
(b) | the power to order the cessation of infringements and, where appropriate, to impose remedies proportionate to the infringement and necessary to bring the infringement effectively to an end, or to request a judicial authority in their Member State to do so; |
(c) | the power to impose fines, or to request a judicial authority in their Member State to do so, in accordance with Article 52 for failure to comply with this Regulation, including with any of the investigative orders issued pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article; |
(d) | the power to impose a periodic penalty payment, or to request a judicial authority in their Member State to do so, in accordance with Article 52 to ensure that an infringement is terminated in compliance with an order issued pursuant to point (b) of this subparagraph or for failure to comply with any of the investigative orders issued pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article; |
(e) | the power to adopt interim measures or to request the competent national judicial authority in their Member State to do so, to avoid the risk of serious harm. |
As regards the first subparagraph, points (c) and (d), 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 providing those other persons in good time with all relevant information relating to such orders, including the applicable period, the fines or periodic payments that may be imposed for failure to comply and the possibilities for redress.
3. Where needed for carrying out their tasks under this Regulation, Digital Services Coordinators shall, in respect of providers of intermediary_services falling within the competence of their Member State, where all other powers pursuant to this Article to bring about the cessation of an infringement have been exhausted and the infringement has not been remedied or is continuing and is causing serious harm which cannot be avoided through the exercise of other powers available under Union or national law, also have the power to take the following measures:
(a) | to require the management body of those providers, without undue delay, 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; |
(b) | where the Digital Services Coordinator considers that a provider of intermediary_services has not sufficiently complied with the requirements referred to in point (a), that the infringement has not been remedied or is continuing and is causing serious harm, and that that infringement entails a criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons, to request that the competent judicial authority of its Member State order the temporary restriction of access of recipients to 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. |
The Digital Services Coordinator shall, except where it acts upon the Commission’s request referred to in Article 82, prior to submitting the request referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b), of this paragraph invite interested parties to submit written observations within a period that shall not be less than two weeks, describing the measures that it intends to request and identifying the intended addressee or addressees thereof. The provider of intermediary_services, the intended addressee or addressees and any other third party demonstrating a legitimate interest shall be entitled to participate in the proceedings before the competent judicial authority. Any measure ordered shall be proportionate to the nature, gravity, recurrence and duration of the infringement, without unduly restricting access to lawful information by recipients of the service concerned.
The restriction of access shall be for a period of four weeks, subject to the possibility for the competent judicial authority, in its order, to allow the Digital Services Coordinator to extend that period for further periods of the same lengths, subject to a maximum number of extensions set by that judicial authority. The Digital Services Coordinator shall only extend the period where, having regard to the rights and interests of all parties affected by that restriction and all relevant circumstances, including any information that the provider of intermediary_services, the addressee or addressees and any other third party that demonstrated a legitimate interest may provide to it, it considers that both of the following conditions have been met:
(a) | the provider of intermediary_services has failed to take the necessary measures to terminate the infringement; |
(b) | the temporary restriction does not unduly restrict access to lawful information by recipients of the service, having regard to the number of recipients affected and whether any adequate and readily accessible alternatives exist. |
Where the Digital Services Coordinator considers that the conditions set out in the third subparagraph, points (a) and (b), have been met but it cannot further extend the period pursuant to the third subparagraph, it shall submit a new request to the competent judicial authority, as referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b).
4. The powers listed in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be without prejudice to Section 3.
5. The measures taken by the Digital Services Coordinators in the exercise of their powers listed in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be effective, dissuasive and proportionate, having regard, in particular, to the nature, gravity, recurrence and duration of the infringement or suspected infringement to which those measures relate, as well as the economic, technical and operational capacity of the provider of the intermediary_services concerned where relevant.
6. Member States shall lay down specific rules and procedures for the exercise of the powers pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 and shall ensure that any exercise of those powers is subject to adequate safeguards laid down in the applicable national law in compliance 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.
Article 68
Power to take interviews and statements
1. In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may interview any natural or legal person who consents to being interviewed for the purpose of collecting information, relating to the subject-matter of an investigation, in relation to the suspected infringement. The Commission shall be entitled to record such interview by appropriate technical means.
2. If the interview referred to in paragraph 1 is conducted on other premises than those of the Commission, the Commission shall inform the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in the territory of which the interview takes place. If so requested by that Digital Services Coordinator, its officials may assist the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission to conduct the interview.
whereas