Data Act · Regulation (EU) 2023/2854
Article 23
Compare the available Commission, Council and Parliament texts and amendments affecting this article.
Article total: 1 part · 0 Council drafts · 1 Parliament amendment
Removed wording is struck through; added or replacement wording is highlighted.
Institutional text
European Commission proposal
All Commission’s changes to Data ActThe wording proposed by the Commission at the start of this legislative file.
No standalone Commission wording is mapped to these tracked parts. A newly proposed provision may have no earlier text of its own.
Institutional text
Council Presidency texts
Successive Presidency compromise texts. Their inclusion does not imply agreement or adoption.
No Council wording is mapped to these tracked parts.
Competing proposals
European Parliament amendments
These are alternative tabled amendments. An amendment affecting several tracked parts appears once here, with each target identified.
More filters
Additional proposed wording Amendment 684 · Julie Rechagneux, Mélanie Disdier, Aleksandar Nikolic, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Alexandre Varaut, Fabrice Leggeri, Marion Maréchal, Christophe Bay ITRE · LIBE
14a. In Article 23, the following paragraph 2b is inserted:
For the switching of services involving the training or operation of artificial intelligence models or other compute-intensive workloads, the obligations under paragraph 2 shall be understood as requiring functional portability. Functional portability is ensured where the provider of data processing services enables the customer to:
export trained model parameters, including model weights, in commonly used and interoperable formats;
obtain the configuration necessary to redeploy the workload in an alternative environment, including through infrastructure-as-code templates or equivalent means.
Proprietary compute optimisations that are specific to a given hardware or software environment, and that cannot reasonably be replicated in an alternative environment, shall not be subject to the obligations under paragraph 2, provided that the provider offers equivalent functional performance guarantees for the redeployment of the workload. Such optimisations shall not be used to create obstacles to switching within the meaning of point (a) of paragraph 2.
The technical standards and formats referred to in this paragraph, including any exceptions specific to artificial intelligence and compute-intensive workloads, may be specified in the implementing acts referred to in Articles 30(3) and 33(5).
Justification
Article 23 requires providers to enable data portability, but that requirement is technically unachievable for many AI workloads, in particular large models trained on custom high-performance computing clusters relying on hardware-specific optimisations. The amendment introduces functional portability: export of model parameters in interoperable formats and provision of the configuration necessary to redeploy the workload. Proprietary compute optimisations are exempted only where the provider offers equivalent functional performance guarantees, and may not be used to create obstacles to switching.
against:
Article 23
Removing obstacles to effective switching
-
Providers of data processing services shall take the measures provided for in Articles 25, 26, 27, 29 and 30 to enable customers to switch to a data processing service, covering the same service type, which is provided by a different provider of data processing services, or to on-premises ICT infrastructure, or, where relevant, to use several providers of data processing services at the same time. In particular, providers of data processing services shall not impose and shall remove pre-commercial, commercial, technical, contractual and organisational obstacles, which inhibit customers from:
- 2b.
For the switching of services involving the training or operation of artificial intelligence models or other compute-intensive workloads, the obligations under paragraph 2 shall be understood as requiring functional portability. Functional portability is ensured where the provider of data processing services enables the customer to:
- (a)
export trained model parameters, including model weights, in commonly used and interoperable formats;
- (b)
obtain the configuration necessary to redeploy the workload in an alternative environment, including through infrastructure-as-code templates or equivalent means.
-
Proprietary compute optimisations that are specific to a given hardware or software environment, and that cannot reasonably be replicated in an alternative environment, shall not be subject to the obligations under paragraph 2, provided that the provider offers equivalent functional performance guarantees for the redeployment of the workload. Such optimisations shall not be used to create obstacles to switching within the meaning of point (a) of paragraph 2.
-
The technical standards and formats referred to in this paragraph, including any exceptions specific to artificial intelligence and compute-intensive workloads, may be specified in the implementing acts referred to in Articles 30(3) and 33(5).
- (a)
- (a)
terminating, after the maximum notice period and the successful completion of the switching process, in accordance with Article 25, the contract of the data processing service;
- (b)
concluding new contracts with a different provider of data processing services covering the same service type;
- (c)
porting the customer’s exportable data and digital assets, to a different provider of data processing services or to an on-premises ICT infrastructure, including after having benefited from a free-tier offering;
- (d)
in accordance with Article 24, achieving functional equivalence in the use of the new data processing service in the ICT environment of a different provider of data processing services covering the same service type;
- (e)
unbundling, where technically feasible, data processing services referred to in Article 30(1) from other data processing services provided by the provider of data processing services.
No amendments match these filters.
Selected texts
Compare wording
Choose a tracked part and a named pair of texts. Comparisons are offered only where both sides cover the same legal unit.
Select a specific tracked part above to compare wording.
No same-scope comparison is available for this tracked part. Its source wording remains available in the article text sections.