OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Software AG

SAG

Software AG helps companies with their digital transformation.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Data Act (including the review of the Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases)

12 May 2022

With its draft Data Act (Data Act-E), the EU Commission has presented far-reaching regulations for the access and use of non-personal data in the EU. In our view, the Data Act as a horizontal regulation - if done right - offers the opportunity to shape an open and democratic data economy guided by European values, in which there is a fair distribution between those involved in the creation of value. However, we have the impression that no problem analysis was carried out in the run-up to the Data Act, which would have taken its fundamental importance sufficiently into account. In particular, the Commission's explanatory memorandum is largely based on assumptions - which are well-founded and comprehensible - but lacks empirical evidence. Without this, however, the Data Act has feet of clay. Moreover, in our opinion, the complex and multi-layered effects - and above all side effects - of the Data Act have not yet been adequately taken into account. Since the Data Act acts as a horizontal regulation across all industries and sectors, serious collateral damage is to be feared. Software AG is very concerned that the Data Act in its current form is associated with unnecessary effort, costs and legal uncertainties for companies. This risks deterring companies from investing in the development of IoT products and services. We are particularly concerned about the regulations on switching between data processing service providers in Chapter 6. We expressly support the EU Commission's goal of facilitating switching between service providers by reducing lock-ins and thus strengthening competition in Europe. However, the proposed regulations on switching go beyond what is technically feasible as well as what makes economic sense in many places.
Read full response

Response to Legislative framework for the governance of common European data spaces

27 Jan 2021

Software AG highly welcomes the Commission's objective to foster the availability of data and thus laying the foundation for a European data economy. We share the Commission's view that this requires a European approach. Isolated legislations by the Member States on data-related issues bear the risk of fragmenting the Single Market. Regardless of which Member State the data originates from, it must be allowed to use them across Europe according to the same rules. Only then will European companies benefit from the Single Market and can scale up quickly. From Software AG's point of view, trusted data intermediaries can be an important building block for the development of a European data economy. They have the potential to drive data sharing across companies and industries, not only by acting as a central point of contact for data providers and data consumers, but also by acting as a neutral third party, thus strengthening trust in data-sharing. In addition, we believe it is important to improve the usability of open data. Software AG believes four points to be crucial for the success of the Data Governance Act and its ambitious goal to accelerate the development of a data economy in Europe. First, it should be left to the companies alone to decide how they exchange their data. This is the only way they can chose the best option for them economically, technically, and organizationally. A data intermediary is only one of many options. There should therefore be no obligation to exchange or share data through trusted data intermediaries only. Such an obligation would not only reduce efficiency but also hinder innovation. Second, it must be clearly defined which types of platforms fall within the scope of the Data Governance Act. Basically, two categories of platforms can be distinguished: on the one hand, platforms that act as brokers; on the other hand, platforms that act as technical enablers. In the light of the Data Governance Act's goal of improving data availability via trusted data intermediaries, the Regulation should be limited exclusively to the first category of platforms - i.e. to platforms that act as broker. In contrast, platforms through which data exchange is technically implemented should not be covered by the Regulation. They already enjoy the trust of their users, which is why there is no need for a regulation. Software AG therefore highly welcomes, that the Commission shares our view, stating that data exchange platforms used exclusively by a single data owner to enable the use of the data in its possession, as well as platforms developed in connection with objects and devices connected to the Internet of Things and whose main objective is to ensure the functions of the connected object or device and to enable value-added services, are not covered by the Regulation. Third, it must be ensured that the regulatory burdens imposed by the Data Governance Act are kept to a minimum. Against this background, Software AG strongly welcomes the Commission's approach of monitoring compliance with the requirements ex post. This guarantees a level playing field for all companies in Europe. In this context, it is important to ensure consistent enforcement of the Regulation across Europe. Software AG therefore strongly advocates the greatest possible harmonization of national supervisory regimes at the European level. Fourth, the usability of open data needs to be improved. When it comes to exploiting public sector data, companies still face high hurdles. In this regard, two hurdles are of particular importance: first, the lack of metadata or inconsistent metadata, and second the lack of standards for data provision. Both hurdles make it difficult for companies to use open data. To solve both problems, public sector should be given uniform and binding guidelines across the EU on how it should describe its open data and which interfaces and formats it should use to make this data available to third parties.
Read full response

Response to Requirements for Artificial Intelligence

1 Sept 2020

Software AG highly welcomes the Commission's objective to increase trust in AI thus fostering not only its use but also its development in Europe. We share the Commission's view that while AI can do much good, some of its uses and applications may cause both material and immaterial harm. Like the Commission we believe that trust is a precondition for the success of AI and that this objective can be best reached at Union level. As stated by the Commission, a public intervention can be one way to increase trust in AI both for citizens as well as for businesses. However, we share the Commission's view that there is a natural conflict between the benefits of a regulation on the one hand and its compliance costs on the other: the larger the scope, the higher the costs. As the Commission itself points out, this natural conflict may lead to the situation where some desirable AI systems may not be developed at all. To prevent the public intervention from such an unintended outcome, a balanced approach is needed. Against this context, Software AG endorses option 3a. From our point of view, option 3a fulfills best the requirement for a balanced approach increasing trust in AI without being prohibitive. For the same reason, Software AG rejects option 1 as well as option 3c. While the former is inappropriate to significantly increase trust in AI, the latter would massively hamper the development and uptake of AI in Europe. Regarding the specific category of AI applications covered by Option 3a, we believe that all those AI applications should be considered that are of outstanding importance to citizens and therefore essential for their trust in AI. In our opinion, this is in particular true for AI applications that entail risks for fundamental rights (e.g. remote biometric identification systems). We share the Commission´s view, that whilst no new rights are needed, some characteristics of AI may hamper the effective enforcement of existing EU law meant to protect fundamental rights. In the implementation of option 3a, we prefer the scenario of co-regulation, where the legislative instrument would consist in high-level principles to be complemented by industry-led norms (e.g. stand-ards or codes of conduct). In our opinion, a mayor advantage of co-regulation is its friendliness for SMEs. As the Commission rightly points out, given the high scalability of digital technologies, SMEs must also be covered by the public intervention. Apart from the protection of fundamental rights, we see neither the need nor the point for a dedicated regulation for AI. We believe that the vast majority of AI applications do not bear any risks at all and that for the very few high-risk applications adjustments to the existing legal and regulatory framework are absolutely sufficient - if they are not covered by Option 3a anyway. The revisions of the Machinery Directive and of the General Product Safety Liability Directive being prepared offer the opportunity to do so. As emphasized by the Commission, any fragmentation of the Single Digital Market must be prevented. This would not only hamper the uptake of AI in Europe, but above all it would put European AI providers at a serious competitive disadvantage. Software AG therefore welcomes the announced set up of a European governance structure on AI to improve cooperation between (national and European) regulatory authorities thus ensuring an effective and consistent enforcement of rules for AI across Europe.
Read full response

Response to Legislative framework for the governance of common European data spaces

31 Jul 2020

Software AG welcomes the Commission's aim to stimulate data sharing within and across sectors in Europe, thereby creating a Single Market for data. This is more important than ever in view of the severe recession resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. As stated by the Commission, digital business models hold enormous economic potential. In order to unlock it, most companies depend typically on data from third parties. Therefore, data sharing arrangements must be found between them which clearly regulate access to and use of the data needed. In this context, Software AG welcomes the Commission's decision to focus on voluntary data sharing and not to consider policy options that would change the situation with respect to rights and obligations persons and organisations have with regard to specific data. From our point of view, it must solely be left to the data owners – with the exception of anti-competitive behavior – to decide which of their data they will make available to third parties and which they will not. Only in this way it is possible for companies to protect their know-how effectively. In this sense any regulation that would oblige companies to disclose their data must be strictly rejected and would also set the Single Market for data at risk. Companies would have the wrong incentive either to collect as little data as possible or to protect their data from being used by others through a jungle of incompatible semantics, formats and descriptions. Against this background, Software AG believes that lowering transaction cost is the right way to enhance data use in the society and economy. Although we do not believe that there is a lack of trusted technical infrastructures supporting data sharing in Europe, companies are currently faced with a number of legal, organizational and technical hurdles when it comes to data sharing. Often these hurdles cause such high transaction costs that they make the exchange of data difficult, and sometimes even impossible. This leads to the paradoxical situation that despite rapidly increasing data volumes, there is a lack of data in Europe. As a result, companies are unable to implement their digital business models. Software AG believes that the European data spaces offer an opportunity to overcome this situation and to leverage current-ly untapped potential for value creation in Europe. The structural enablers for data sharing proposed by the Commission can be an effective as well efficient instrument for lowering transaction costs drastically.
Read full response