This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Digital Services Act / Digital Markets Act'.

From:                                 Berfin Eken
Sent:                                  Fri, 15 Oct 2021 11:23:26 +0200
To:                                      I Registrator
Subject:                             VB: EU Digital Services Act
Attachments:                   DSA suggestions.docx
Categories:                       LF
 
Från: Eleanor Flanagan <xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> 
Skickat: den 13 oktober 2021 11:02
Till: Berfin Eken <xxxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx>
Kopia: Marcus Boklund <xxxxxx.xxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx>; xxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; 
xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx; Helene Engellau 
<xxxxxx.xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx>
Ämne: Re: EU Digital Services Act
 
Hi Berfin and Helene, 
Thank you very much for our discussion on the DSA last week. 
As discussed, I attach our suggestions regarding Article 2 (definitions) and Article 25 (VLOPs 
identification).
As we explained, it is essential for us to clarify the application of the DSA to "hybrid" platforms 
that offer a mix of licensed content and UGC content, and that it is only those users who 
consume user-generated content who should be calculated in the designation of VLOPs.
We also believe a more nuanced approach is needed to identify VLOPs, 
encompassing qualitative risk assessment criteria. Only examining user numbers is likely to lead 
to an over-broad legislation, capturing many companies that should not be the target of such 
obligations. A risk-based approach would be consistent with the general graduated structure of 
the DSA and the notion of a risk assessment that is already included in Article 26, and is also 
being examined in the European Parliament. 
Lastly, we believe more flexibility and proportionality is needed in the obligations regarding 
recommender systems, knowing that the DSA is a horizontal legislation that will apply to very 
different business models. We are reflecting on ways to do this and will come back to you with 
suggestions, if that's ok.
Please do not hesitate to let us know if you have any questions or comments, and thank you 
again for your time.
Kind regards,
Eleanor
 
On Fri, 1 Oct 2021 at 14:38, Eleanor Flanagan <xxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
Hi Berfin,

Coming back to you on this and as we discussed separately, we provide below some initial remarks 
on the DSA. 
We will be very happy to explain Spotify's position in more detail on our call on Monday. Of course, 
we are also very interested in understanding your priorities for the legislation.
Please do not hesitate to let us know if you have any questions, and we look forward to our 
discussion.
Best regards,
Eleanor
 The DSA will apply in part to our service, namely to some of our podcasts that are uploaded by 
individual creators. In this context, we very much support the goals of the DSA to clarify what 
platforms need to do to address illegal content and to harmonise the rules at the EU level. We 
also welcome the preservation of the core principles of the e-Commerce Directive, notably 
COO enforcement. 
 However, we are concerned that the number and scope of the proposed obligations will 
disproportionately affect medium-sized European platforms, at a time when they should be 
focused on international growth and innovation. We believe that certain changes to the DSA 
are needed in order to ensure the legislation is proportionate and manageable for the wide 
array of businesses to which it will apply. This will help to ensure that platforms' resources are 
focused on the key issue at hand, i.e. addressing illegal content that harms consumers and 
society at large. 
 We are particularly worried about the proposed approach to identify Very Large Online 
Platforms (Art.25), which is based on a simple user threshold. User numbers alone do not 
imply systemic risks to consumers or society, and this approach is likely to result in an over-
broad Regulation capturing many companies that should not be the target of the additional 
obligations. We suggest a more nuanced designation approach, including qualitative risk 
assessment criteria. This would be consistent with the general graduated structure of the DSA 
and the notion of a risk assessment already included in Article 26. 
 In addition, the broad application of certain obligations which have been crafted with specific 
business models in mind is likely to have wide-ranging implications for the digital economy. 
For example, Art.29 on recommender systems is highly problematic for personalised digital 
services offering cultural content such as Spotify. We also believe certain transparency and 
reporting obligations - such as those in Art.15 - are overly prescriptive and could be 
counterproductive from the point of view of making the platform safer for consumers. 
  
On Mon, 27 Sept 2021 at 11:32, Berfin Eken <xxxxxx.xxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx> wrote:
Hi Eleanor, 
 
Thank you for your e-mail! It was forwarded to me through Marcus as we work with the DSA 
together. 
 
A video-conference sounds like a good idea. The beginning of next week would suit us the best if it 
works for you too. Would you be available at for example 14:00 the 4th or 10:00 the 5th of October?