On Monday 9 October, MEPs on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) discussed the 118 or so amendments tabled by the European Parliament’s political groups concerning the addictive nature of online platforms and consumer protection. Compromises will have to be found on a number of points - starting with the issue of reversing the burden of proof in the event of a dispute - if the groups want to achieve the objective of a committee vote on 25 or 26 October.
“We still need to discuss the reversal of the burden of proof, which is an increasingly common practice for platforms”, confirmed the Dutch rapporteur, Kim van Sparrentak (Greens/EFA), in favour of this measure.
For the S&D Group, which has tabled amendments along these lines, the burden of proof should be reversed in order to “guarantee the protection of online consumers”, said Marc Angel (from Luxembourg). “We can’t rely on consumer consent, we have to protect them by default right from the design stage [of interfaces]. Consumers should expect the environment in which they operate to be trustworthy, even if they have not had time to read the legal notices”, he added.
However, the Renew Europe Group is opposed to such a provision, believing that a dialogue should be conducted with industry players. According to Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew Europe, French), this would prevent the reversal of the burden of proof from placing “an enormous burden on SMEs”.
The amendments tabled by Mrs Yon-Courtin also propose a sectoral approach to ensure that future legislation takes into account the risks, “which differ from one platform to another”. “This has to be adapted to each sector”, she added.
Her group would also like an impact assessment to be carried out, as well as “a state of the art of current or forthcoming legislation”, such as the DSA (see EUROPE 13262/9) or legislation on artificial intelligence (see EUROPE 13263/15).
On this point, Stéphane Séjourné’s group is joined by the conservatives in the ECR Group. “We are also in favour of analysing existing or future rules, such as the DSA, the AI Act or forthcoming legislative proposals. We need to engage in dialogue with stakeholders and assess the impact. We need to be cautious and have a coherent framework”, summed up Geert Bourgeois (ECR, Belgian).
A number of MEPs also stressed the need to step up awareness-raising measures. “We need to think about the role of parents and guardians, and how we can support them, because they also have to ensure that children evolve in a safe digital environment”, said Mr Bourgeois.
His group also wants to “nuance the debate” to differentiate between online services that “are not all addictive, such as banking or translation applications”.
At next week’s meeting of Parliament’s shadow rapporteurs, discussions will also focus on access to interface dashboards and data, to “see why certain applications have been designed the way they have”, summarised Mrs van Sparrentak (Greens/EFA, Dutch). (Original version in French by Thomas Mangin)