The legislative proposal tackling unfair relations between the platforms and businesses presented on Thursday 26 April by the European Commission received a rather enthusiastic response from stakeholders.
The responses were rather positive from the main political groups at the European Parliament (EPP and S&D) and from the industry (Marketplace Coalition, Digital Europe, EuroCommerce and Impala). They all welcomed the Commission's determination to create a fair, transparent and predictable economic environment for businesses and small-scale traders that use online platforms.
The draft regulation does not differ enormously from what was leaked to the press a few weeks ago (see EUROPE 11989). It is based on co-regulation and makes it incumbent on the online platforms (Amazon Marketplace, eBay, Fnac Marketplace, etc) and the online search engines (such as Google Search, Yahoo!, Bing, etc.) to comply with the legal obligations and encourages them to take additional voluntary measures. This initiative is related to the approach that involved the fine for dominant position abuses imposed on Google on 27 June 2017 after it had shown favouritism to its own Google Shopping price comparing website.
Ratings transparency
One of the main measures the Commission is proposing to tackle includes the way in which the research results are rated (article 5). It is calling on the platform intermediaries and search engines to indicate in a clear and comprehensible way the main parameters they use for establishing their ratings (such as general criteria, processes, specific signals integrated with algorithms and other adjustment mechanisms).
The draft recommendation also makes it compulsory for the online intermediation services to: (1) indicate in advance the reasons for terminating a professional user’s referral or suspending them from a platform; (2) to respect reasonable minimum notice periods for amending modalities and conditions; (3) formulating and publishing their general policy by outlining the rules for accessing data (article 7), the existence of differentiated treatment (article 6) or the use of contractual clauses.
Complaints system
The text encourages alternative conflict resolution methods through a mediator, whilst adding that intervention by a national court is also possible if required. It also explains that half of all legal costs should be incurred by the platforms and that the organisations representing the businesses will have the right to go to court on behalf of businesses that have suffered damages. It also requires the intermediation services that have more than 50 employees to introduce internal services for dealing with complaints and suggests that voluntary special independent mediators services are set up.
The Commission is also suggesting that an EU Observatory is set up to monitor the impact of the new rules.
Some less enthusiastic responses
Less enthusiastic responses came from the Council for the Information Technology Industry (this represents Amazon, Google and eBay at global level) and it “questions” the idea of a regulation exclusively orientated on the platforms. The UEAPME (crafts and SMEs) considers that settling disputes through mediation should remain voluntary and the price parity clauses should be banned. The European Trade Union Confederation would like the proposal to cover individuals working on employment platforms too. The draft regulation can be examined at the following link: https://bit.ly/2FgPRHW . (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)