Latest news with #AxelVoss
Euronews
20-05-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Commission to offer mid-cap companies data protection relief
The European Commission will offer relief to small mid-cap companies burdened by the current scope of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in a rule simplification package known as an Omnibus to be published on Wednesday, according to a working document seen by Euronews. Currently, companies with fewer than 250 employees are exempt from the data privacy rules to reduce their administrative costs, the Commission now proposes to extend this derogation to the so-called small mid-cap companies. Small mid-cap companies can employ up to 500 employees and make higher turnovers. Under the plan - the Commission's fourth such Omnibus - such companies will only have to keep a record of the processing of the users' data when it's considered 'high risk', for example private medical information. The change comes seven years after the GDPR took effect. Since then the rulebook has shielded consumer data from US tech giants but is also perceived as burdensome for smaller and mid-sized companies that often did not have the means to hire data protection lawyers. The biggest fine issued under the rules so far is €1.2 billion on US tech giant Meta: the Irish data protection authority fined the company in 2023 for invalid data transfers. Although fines are generally lower for smaller businesses, at up to €20 million or 4% of annual turnover they remain significant. In the Netherlands for example, VoetbalTV, a video platform for amateur football games, was fined €575,000 by the Dutch privacy regulator in 2018. Although the company appealed and the court overturned the fine, it had to file for bankruptcy. Both EU lawmaker Axel Voss (Germany/EPP), who was involved in steering the legislation through the European Parliament, and Austrian privacy activist Max Schrems, whose organisation NOYB filed numerous data protection complaints with regulators, called for different rules for smaller companies earlier this year. Under the plan, 90% of the businesses – small retailers and manufacturers -- would just face minor compliance tasks and would not need an in-house data protection officer anymore, no excessive documentation and lower administrative fines, capped at €500,000. Voss said his proposal would not weaken the EU's privacy standards, but make it 'more enforceable, and more proportionate'. Similar calls are coming from the member states: the new German government stressed in its coalition plan that it will work on EU level to ensure that 'non-commercial activities (for example, associations), small and medium-sized enterprises, and low-risk data processing are exempt from the scope of the GDPR.' By contrast, civil society and consumer groups have warned that the Commission's plan to ease GDPR rules could have unintended consequences. On Tuesday, privacy advocacy group EDRi stated in an open letter that the change risks 'weakening key accountability safeguards' by making data protection obligations depend on company size rather than the actual risk to people's rights. It also fears this could lead to further pressure to roll back other parts of the GDPR. Consumer advocates share similar concerns, in a letter from late April, pan-European consumer group BEUC warned that even small companies can cause serious harm through data breaches. It argued that using headcount or turnover as a basis for exemptions could create legal uncertainty and go against EU fundamental rights. Both groups say the focus should instead be on better enforcement of existing rules and more practical support for small companies. Meanwhile reforms of the data privacy law are under negotiation between the Council and the European Parliament. A new round of political discussions on the GDPR Procedural Regulation is expected to take place on Wednesday. EU institutions are attempting to finalise a long-awaited deal to improve cooperation between national data protection authorities. The regulation is meant to address delays and inconsistencies in how cross-border cases are handled under the GDPR, by harmonising procedures and timelines. According to experts familiar with the file, one of the main sticking points is whether to introduce binding deadlines for national authorities to act on complaints. While the Parliament has pushed for clearer timelines to speed up enforcement, some member states argue that fixed deadlines could overwhelm authorities and increase legal risks. This change is however not expected to impact the Commission's 4th Omnibus package. Chip giant Nvidia painted its roadmap for an artificial intelligence (AI), agentic AI, and humanoid future at the COMPUTEX technology conference in Taiwan on Monday, with CEO Jensen Huang highlighting the country as "the computer epicentre". Taiwan-born Huang said he had been coming to the tech fair for the past 30 years and that his parents were in the audience. Back in 2016, when he first started speaking about GTX graphic cards, he said no one understood what he was talking about and there were few clients. It was then that the company donated its technology to the then-non-profit OpenAI. The rest, as they say, is history. Here are all the highlights from Huang's keynote speech, which Euronews Next attended. Wearing his trademark black leather jacket in 30-degree Celsius heat and a humid climate, Huang announced that Nvidia would build an AI factory supercomputer, which he called the "first AI supercomputer for Taiwan's ecosystem". He did not go into much detail, but he did say Nvidia would partner with Foxconn, the Taiwanese government, and chip maker TSMC. The AI supercomputer will help fuel innovation and expand AI computing in Taiwan, which will help the country's scientists and start-ups, Jensen said. "Our plan is to create an AI-focused industrial ecosystem in southern Taiwan," said Minister Wu Cheng-Wen of the National Science and Technology Council in a statement. "We are focused on investing in innovative research, developing a strong AI industry, and encouraging the everyday use of AI tools. Our ultimate goal is to create a smart AI island filled with smart cities, and we look forward to collaborating with NVIDIA and Hon Hai to make this vision a reality". "No company in history has ever revealed a roadmap for five years at a time, no one will tell you what's coming next," Huang said. "But we realised Nvidia is not a tech company only anymore, it's an infrastructure company," he added. As well as specifying that Nvidia is an AI infrastructure company, he added that the current infrastructure built on electricity and the Internet will be transformed into an 'intelligence infrastructure' where AI is integrated into everything. Another thing we will be talking about in five years, says Huang, is tokens, which are any digitally transferable asset between two people, for example, but not limited to, cryptocurrency. "Very soon, we will be talking about how many tokens we produce every hour," he said, adding that the AI infrastructure business will be measured in "trillions of dollars". AI agents, described as digital assistants, will also continue to generate a buzz in the next five years, Huang said. The future Huang predicts is that there will be many digital employees who will fill the labour shortage. "The shortage of labour is limiting the world's ability to grow," he said, adding that AI agents can work with humans to plug this gap. He said that Nvidia engineers have a "layer of AI agents" that help them with their tasks. "We have to create the necessary tools for workers to manage and improve AI agents," he said, adding that AI agents could even speak to each other in the future. But before the real development gets underway, Huang said that "we have to reinvent computing". Lastly, Huang announced a new office for Nvidia's Taiwan operation, which will be called 'Nvidia Constellation'. Engineers in Taiwan are growing beyond the limits of our current office, so we are building this brand new office". Huang said that work on the building will start as soon as the company can, but did not set a firm date.
Euronews
12-03-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Lawmakers to scrutinise AI influence on finance, copyright
The reports come as the financial sector and publishers have been calling for clarity on how the AI Act applies to their industries. ADVERTISEMENT The European Parliament will begin work on two own-initiative reports on the impact of artificial intelligence on the financial sector and on copyright, after they were approved by chairs of political groups last week, sources have told Euronews. The first, to consider the 'Impact of artificial intelligence on the financial sector' will be drafted by lawmaker Arba Kokalari (Sweden/EPP) and was requested by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) with input from the Internal Market Committee (IMCO), Parliament sources confirmed. Work on the AI Act – the framework that regulates AI via a risk-based approach – last year was mainly carried out by the IMCO and the Civil Liberties Committee (LIBE). The rules started gradually applying last year and will be fully in force in 2027. Last June, the European Commission launched a consultation and a workshop series to seek input from stakeholders on the use of AI in finance to help assess risks related to the implementation of the AI Act, but it has not proposed any concrete action for the sector. Earlier this month, NGO Finance Watch warned about the possible conflict between AI functions and the principles of financial regulation. Without clear rules and accountability mechanisms, the use of AI in financial services 'introduces risks that are difficult to detect and control, threatening consumer protection and market stability while undermining trust in the wider financial system,' Finance Watch said. Copyright The second report – both will not be legally binding – 'Copyright and Generative AI: opportunities and challenges', was requested by the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI), and will be drafted by Axel Voss (Germany/EPP). 'During the AI Act negotiations, nobody wanted to talk about copyright. Now, writers, musicians and creatives are left exposed by an irresponsible legal gap. What I do not understand is that we are supporting big tech instead of protecting European creative ideas and content,' Voss said in a post on LinkedIn earlier last month. Complications surrounding AI and copyright arose during the drafting of a proposed set of rules for providers of General-Purpose Artificial Intelligence (GPAI) - a process still ongoing. The Code of Practice on GPAI should help providers of AI models – tools that can perform many tasks such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini and picture application Midjourney – comply with the EU's AI Act, but industry, including rightsholders expressed concerns about contradictions with copyright law.
The Guardian
19-02-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
EU accused of leaving ‘devastating' copyright loophole in AI Act
An architect of EU copyright law has said legislation is needed to protect writers, musicians and creatives left exposed by an 'irresponsible' legal gap in the EU's Artificial Intelligence Act. The intervention came as 15 cultural organisations wrote to the European Commission this week warning that draft rules to implement the AI Act were 'taking several steps backwards' on copyright, while one writer spoke of a 'devastating' loophole. Axel Voss, a German centre-right member of the European parliament, who played a key role in writing the EU's 2019 copyright directive, said that law was never conceived to deal with generative AI models: systems that can generate text, images or music with a simple text prompt. Voss told the Guardian that 'a legal gap' had opened up after the conclusion of the EU's AI Act, which meant copyright was not enforceable in this area. 'What I do not understand is that we are supporting big tech instead of protecting European creative ideas and content.' The EU's AI Act, which came into force last year, was already in the works when ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot that can generate essays, jokes and job applications, burst into public consciousness in late 2022, becoming the fastest-growing consumer application in history. ChatGPT was developed by OpenAI, which is also behind the AI image generator Dall-E. The rapid rise of generative AI systems, which are based on vast troves of books, newspaper articles, images and songs, has caused alarm among authors, newspapers and musicians, triggering a slew of lawsuits about alleged breaches of copyright. Voss said he had been unable to get majorities of EU lawmakers to ensure strong copyright protection when the issue emerged in the late stages of negotiating the AI Act. The absence of strong provisions on copyright was 'irresponsible' and it was 'unbelievable' that the legal gap remained, he said. He would like to see legislation to fill that gap, but said it would take years, after the European Commission's decision last week to withdraw the proposed AI Liability Act. 'It might be getting very difficult. And so the infringement of copyright is continuing, but nobody can prove it.' The AI Act states that tech firms must comply with 2019 copyright law, which includes an exemption for text and data mining. Voss said this exemption from copyright law was intended to have a limited private use, rather than allow the world's largest companies to harvest vast amounts of intellectual property. The introduction of the TDM exemption in the AI Act was 'a misunderstanding', he said. This view was reinforced by a significant academic study last year by the legal scholar Tim Dornis and the computer scientist Sebastian Stober, which concluded that the training of generative AI models on published materials could not be considered 'a case of text and data mining' but 'copyright infringement'. Meanwhile, the TDM exemption has sent shock waves across creative professions. Nina George, a German bestselling author whose works has been translated into 37 languages, described the TDM exception as 'devastating'. Exclusions from copyright, she said, were originally intended to balance the interest of authors against those of the public, such as allowing schools to photocopy texts. 'These AI exceptions for commercial use mean that business interest will be served for the first time,' she said. 'This is a shift of paradigms [and] a perverted way to bend copyrights and authors' rights to serve the interest of a few businesses.' George, who is president of honour at the European Writers Council, said she had no way of finding out if any of her works had been used to feed generative AI systems. 'The lack of instruments to enforce any rights, this is the scandal in the construction of the AI Act [in] relation to copyright directive.' Aafke Romeijn, a Dutch-language electropop artist, said there was no practical way for creatives to opt out of having their work used in AI applications. Companies are not currently obliged to report on the content used to feed generative AI models. From 2 August, tech firms will have to provide a summary of data used in AI models, but details are still being decided. Voss said the latest draft rules on the summary from the EU's AI office were 'not sufficiently detailed' to protect artists. In a letter to the Commission this week, 15 cultural organisations said the draft summary proposals failed to ensure transparency. More generally, the organisations wrote: 'The impact of AI on the authors and performers we represent constitutes a systemic risk.' Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion Romeijn, who is on the board of the European Composer and Songwriter Alliance, which co-signed the letter, said she had been told by senior EU officials to take tech companies to court to preserve her copyright. 'Who is actually going to take a big tech company to court?' she asked, citing cost, time, loss of earnings and potential damage to reputation. 'It is just a very impractical way of implementing legislation.' The European Council of Literary Translators' Associations, which represents 10,000 translators in 28 countries, said it was very concerned about copyright and AI. 'Books are written by human authors and must be translated by human translators to preserve the artistic virtues of the literary work,' it said in response to questions. 'We firmly believe that authors, performers and creative workers must have the right to decide whether their works can be used by generative AI and, if they consent, to be fairly remunerated.' In December, mostly the same cultural organisations wrote to the European Commission vice-president Henna Virkkunen to raise concerns that EU law 'fails to adequately protect the rights of our creative communities and the value of their cultural works'. On Monday, nearly 11 weeks later, the commission had not replied, according to three signatories. 'So far it does not seem that she [Virkkunen] has an ear or an understanding – I am sorry to say that – of the whole value chain and how it works in the cultural and creative industries,' said George. Brando Benifei, an Italian Social Democrat who jointly represented the European parliament in negotiations on the AI Act, contested the view that creatives were unprotected. He described the AI Act as 'a very strong text' that had the potential to create 'a very large rebalancing of power between the developers and the rights holders'. From 'day one' after the law was voted in, there had been an effort 'to dilute and to interpret in a minimalistic way the provisions', he added. '[This] has been the obsession of the big tech companies because it is probably the part of the AI act that can be most impactful in terms of costs for the big generative AI companies.' A European Commission spokesperson said it was 'closely monitoring the global challenges that AI technology development poses to the creative industry' and was 'committed to maintaining a balanced approach that fosters innovation while protecting human creativity'. 'We are assessing the need for additional measures, outside the AI framework,' the spokesperson added, declining to say whether this meant new legislation.
Euronews
17-02-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Sorting through euro trash: What proposals has the Commission scrapped?
Last week, the Commission rolled out its 2025 work programme—essentially a to-do list for the year ahead. There weren't many surprises: we already knew about things like the Competitiveness Compass and the Clean Industrial Deal, with the sole exception of seasonal time changes which had been scrapped in earlier drafts, now back on the table. What really stands out, though, is what the Commission has decided not to do anymore: 37 legislative proposals have been officially shelved, in an effort to cut red tape and clear out stagnant projects. Some of these simply no longer make sense—like a cooperation agreement with the Afghan government, which hasn't existed since the Taliban took over in 2021. But while some other files were doomed from the start, others will likely spark debates over whether they should be revived in a different form. Euronews has curated the most interesting (and controversial) legislative proposals stuck, outdated, or too complicated to agree on, that are now getting tossed. No new AI liability rules One of the biggest surprises in the Commission's discard pile is the AI Liability Directive, originally proposed in 2022 to update rules on damage caused by AI systems. The idea was to ensure consistent protection across the EU, but according to the Commission, there's 'no foreseeable agreement'. German MEP Axel Voss (EPP), who was working on the file, told Euronews that scrapping it was a 'strategic mistake', though the Commission left the door open to revisiting the issue in a different format. E-privacy reform gets shredded The long-stalled overhaul of EU data privacy rules, first proposed in 2017, has also been tossed out. It aimed to restrict surveillance ads, rein in Facebook-style pay-or-consent models, and protect encrypted communication. Despite negotiations dragging on since 2021, progress has been non-existent; despite online rights activists calling to revive talks, the Commission thinks the proposal is outdated given recent tech and legal developments. Anti-discrimination dropped A proposal dating all the way back to 2008, aimed at extending anti-discrimination protections beyond the workplace, has officially been ditched. The directive sought to ensure equal treatment regardless of age, disability, sexual orientation or religious belief. It has been blocked in the EU Council for years, and now the Commission says there's 'no foreseeable agreement'. Green MEP Alice Bah Kuhnke, rapporteur on the file at the Parliament, called it 'a scandal', urging the EU to step up and push for fresh, ambitious legislation in the face of global backsliding on diversity and equality following recent decisions of Donald Trump's administration. Patent reform hits a wall Another contentious removal is the so-called 'patent package" which included proposed updates on standard-essential patents (SEPs) and supplementary protection certificates (SPCs). The Intellectual Property Judges' Association recently warned that these changes could undermine the EU's Unified Patent Court (UPC), creating inconsistent rulings and unnecessary legal battles. Even António Campinos, head of the European Patent Office, had urged a pause in an interview with Euronews—well, now it's been paused indefinitely. Finance rules 'afuera!' Several finance laws have met the same "Afuera!" fate that Argentinian President Milei famously dealt with various government departments in his recent state restructuring. Among the more obscure casualties is a law on the 'third-party effects of assignments of claims'. In plain English, this was about helping companies get liquidity through mechanisms like factoring and collateralisation. More notably, the Commission's 2017 plan to transform the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) into a European Monetary Fund (EMF) has been scrapped, citing a lack of agreement. Some of its ideas have been absorbed into a separate revision of the European Stability Mechanism treaty, though. Less transparency in EU decision-making Bad news for those who like to keep an eye on EU affairs: rules meant to improve public access to EU documents have been shelved, with no progress since 2011. Another niche but significant casualty is the reform of comitology —an obscure EU term for the approval of EU laws. Before the Treaty of Lisbon, comitology was a key decision-making tool that did not require the European Parliament scrutiny. It still survives in certain areas, namely implementing acts of basic EU rules such as directives and regulations. The Commission tried to fix this back in 2015, but after years of deadlock, they've given up. This means that on certain issues (such as approving glyphosate herbicide), the Parliament will still have little to no say.
Euronews
12-02-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Don't drop AI liability mechanism, lead lawmaker warns Commission
The European Parliament's lead lawmaker responsible for steering new AI Liability rules - German European People's Party MEP Axel Voss - has slammed a European Commission plan to withdraw its proposal as a 'strategic mistake'. The Commission's 2025 work program will be presented in Strasbourg on Wednesday, setting out timelines for legislative initiatives in the coming year, but also flagging which proposals will be withdrawn. An AI Liability Directive was proposed in parallel with the Bloc's AI Act in 2022 but according to the EU executive 'no foreseeable agreement' is seen on the proposal in the coming year. The Commission proposed the AI Liability Directive in 2022 in a bid to modernise existing rules with new provisions covering harms caused by AI systems and to ensure uniformity of protection. The document is now on the list of withdrawals. 'The Commission will assess whether another proposal should be tabled or another type of approach should be chosen,' the text says. Voss, who this month began a consultation to gather industry reactions on the scope of the rules to prepare the work in Parliament, told Euronews that the scrapping of the rules will mean 'legal uncertainty, corporate power imbalances, and a Wild West approach to AI liability that benefits only Big Tech." "The reality now is that AI liability will be dictated by a fragmented patchwork of 27 different national legal systems, suffocating European AI startups and SMEs,' he added. Scepticism The Brussels tech lobby and consumer organisations were sceptical about the need for additional rules. They claim that the issues are already covered under the revamped Product Liability Directive (PLD). A study by the Parliament's research service, presented in the Parliament's legal affairs committee (JURI) late January, pointed to problems that might arise as a result of large language models, including ChatGPT and falling out of the scope of the current Product Liability Directive. Voss said that unlike the AI Act, which is an up-front regulatory framework, the liability directive would only apply when AI actually caused harm. "With such strategic mistakes, I unfortunately lack the confidence that we will ever be able to create a future-oriented digital single market," Voss said.
