search


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

2022/2065 EN cercato: 'good' . Output generated live by software developed by IusOnDemand srl


expand index good:

    CHAPTER I
    GENERAL PROVISIONS

    CHAPTER II
    LIABILITY OF PROVIDERS OF INTERMEDIARY SERVICES
  • 1 Art. 7 Voluntary own-initiative investigations and legal compliance

  • 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
  • 1 Art. 21 Out-of-court dispute settlement

  • 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
  • 1 Art. 51 Powers of Digital Services Coordinators

  • SECTION 2
    Competences, coordinated investigation and consistency mechanisms

    SECTION 3
    European Board for Digital Services
  • 1 Art. 60 Joint investigations

  • SECTION 4
    Supervision, investigation, enforcement and monitoring in respect of providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines
  • 1 Art. 69 Power to conduct inspections

  • SECTION 5
    Common provisions on enforcement

    SECTION 6
    Delegated and implementing acts

    CHAPTER V
    FINAL PROVISIONS


whereas good:


definitions:


cloud tag: and the number of total unique words without stopwords is: 670

 

Article 7

Voluntary own-initiative investigations and legal compliance

Providers of intermediary_services shall not be deemed ineligible for the exemptions from liability referred to in Articles 4, 5 and 6 solely because they, in good faith and in a diligent manner, carry out voluntary own-initiative investigations into, or take other measures aimed at detecting, identifying and removing, or disabling access to, illegal_content, or take the necessary measures to comply with the requirements of Union law and national law in compliance with Union law, including the requirements set out in this Regulation.

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 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 60

Joint investigations

1.   The Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment may launch and lead joint investigations with the participation of one or more other Digital Services Coordinators concerned:

(a)

at its own initiative, to investigate an alleged infringement of this Regulation by a given provider of intermediary_services in several Member States; or

(b)

upon recommendation of the Board, acting on the request of at least three Digital Services Coordinators alleging, based on a reasonable suspicion, an infringement by a given provider of intermediary_services affecting recipients of the service in their Member States.

2.   Any Digital Services Coordinator that proves that it has a legitimate interest in participating in a joint investigation pursuant to paragraph 1 may request to do so. The joint investigation shall be concluded within three months from its launch, unless otherwise agreed amongst the participants.

The Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment shall communicate its preliminary position on the alleged infringement no later than one month after the end of the deadline referred to in the first subparagraph to all Digital Services Coordinators, the Commission and the Board. The preliminary position shall take into account the views of all other Digital Services Coordinators participating in the joint investigation. Where applicable, this preliminary position shall also set out the enforcement measures envisaged.

3.   The Board may refer the matter to the Commission pursuant to Article 59, where:

(a)

the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment failed to communicate its preliminary position within the deadline set out in paragraph 2;

(b)

the Board substantially disagrees with the preliminary position communicated by the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment; or

(c)

the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment failed to initiate the joint investigation promptly following the recommendation by the Board pursuant to paragraph 1, point (b).

4.   In carrying out the joint investigation, the participating Digital Services Coordinators shall cooperate in good faith, taking into account, where applicable, the indications of the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment and the Board’s recommendation. The Digital Services Coordinators of destination participating in the joint investigation shall be entitled, at the request of or after having consulted the Digital_Services_Coordinator_of_establishment, to exercise their investigative powers referred to in Article 51(1) in respect of the providers of intermediary_services concerned by the alleged infringement, with regard to information and premises located within their territory.

SECTION 3

European Board for Digital Services

Article 69

Power to conduct inspections

1.   In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may conduct all necessary inspections at the premises of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or of another person referred to in Article 67(1).

2.   The officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission to conduct an inspection shall be empowered to:

(a)

enter any premises, land and means of transport of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine concerned or of the other person concerned;

(b)

examine the books and other records related to the provision of the service concerned, irrespective of the medium on which they are stored;

(c)

take or obtain in any form copies of or extracts from such books or other records;

(d)

require the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned to provide access to and explanations on its organisation, functioning, IT system, algorithms, data-handling and business practices and to record or document the explanations given;

(e)

seal any premises used for purposes related to the trade, business, craft or profession of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or of the other person concerned, as well as books or other records, for the period and to the extent necessary for the inspection;

(f)

ask any representative or member of staff of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned for explanations on facts or documents relating to the subject-matter and purpose of the inspection and to record the answers;

(g)

address questions to any such representative or member of staff relating to the subject-matter and purpose of the inspection and to record the answers.

3.   Inspections may be carried out with the assistance of auditors or experts appointed by the Commission pursuant to Article 72(2), and of Digital Services Coordinator or other competent national authorities of the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is conducted.

4.   Where the production of required books or other records related to the provision of the service concerned is incomplete or where the answers to questions asked under paragraph 2 of this Article are incorrect, incomplete or misleading, the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission to conduct an inspection shall exercise their powers upon production of a written authorisation specifying the subject matter and purpose of the inspection and the penalties provided for in Articles 74 and 76. In good time before the inspection, the Commission shall inform the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in the territory in which the inspection is to be conducted thereof.

5.   During inspections, the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission, the auditors and experts appointed by the Commission, the Digital Services Coordinator or the other competent authorities of the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is conducted may require the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or other person concerned to provide explanations on its organisation, functioning, IT system, algorithms, data-handling and business conducts, and may address questions to its key personnel.

6.   The provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or other natural or legal person concerned shall be required to submit to an inspection ordered by decision of the Commission. The decision shall specify the subject matter and purpose of the inspection, set the date on which it is to begin and indicate the penalties provided for in Articles 74 and 76 and the right to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Commission shall consult the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State on territory of which the inspection is to be conducted prior to taking that decision.

7.   Officials of, and other persons authorised or appointed by, the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State on the territory of which the inspection is to be conducted shall, at the request of that Digital Services Coordinator or of the Commission, actively assist the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission in relation to the inspection. To this end, they shall have the powers listed in paragraph 2.

8.   Where the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission find that the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or the other person concerned opposes an inspection ordered pursuant to this Article, the Member State in the territory of which the inspection is to be conducted shall, at the request of those officials or other accompanying persons and in accordance with the national law of the Member State, afford them necessary assistance, including, where appropriate under that national law, in the form of coercive measures taken by a competent law enforcement authority, so as to enable them to conduct the inspection.

9.   If the assistance provided for in paragraph 8 requires authorisation from a national judicial authority in accordance with the national law of the Member State concerned, such authorisation shall be applied for by the Digital Services Coordinator of that Member State at the request of the officials and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission. Such authorisation may also be applied for as a precautionary measure.

10.   Where the authorisation referred to in paragraph 9 is applied for, the national judicial authority before which a case has been brought shall verify that the Commission decision ordering the inspection is authentic and that the coercive measures envisaged are neither arbitrary nor excessive having regard to the subject matter of the inspection. When conducting such verification, the national judicial authority may ask the Commission, directly or through the Digital Services Coordinators of the Member State concerned, for detailed explanations, in particular those concerning the grounds on which the Commission suspects an infringement of this Regulation, concerning the seriousness of the suspected infringement and concerning the nature of the involvement of the provider of the very large online_platform or of the very large online_search_engine or of the other person concerned. However, the national judicial authority shall not call into question the necessity for the inspection nor demand information from the case file of the Commission. The lawfulness of the Commission decision shall be subject to review only by the Court of Justice of the European Union.


whereas









keyboard_arrow_down