EUTechRegResearch
MenuClose menu
Digital Omnibus legislative tracker
Texts to 22 Oct 2026

Data Act· Article 4

Analysis in our dossiers
Where the file stands

Text

Article 4 Data Act as printed in the Council text of 22 October 2026

The rights and obligations of users and data holders with regard to access, use and making available product data and related service data

Source Council, 22 October 2026. Article 4: ST 14756/26, page 69 · pp. 69–70 · exact text page

Scope This text prints Article 4(6), Article 4(8) only.

Article 4(6)

(6)

Trade secrets shall be preserved and do not have to be disclosed, unless the data holder and the user have taken all necessary measures prior to the disclosure to preserve their confidentiality in particular regarding third parties. The data holder or, where they are not the same person, the trade secret holder shall identify the data which are protected as trade secrets, including in the relevant metadata, and shall agree with the user proportionate technical and organisational measures necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the shared data, in particular in relation to third parties, such as model contractual terms, confidentiality agreements, strict access protocols, technical standards and the application of codes of conduct.

Article 4(8)

8.

Where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that it is likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a significant risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, in particular as regards trade secrets representing industrial manufacturing know-how for entities in the sectors referred to in Annex I and Annex II points 3, 5a, 5d and 5e of Directive (EU) 2022/2555), that data holder may refuse a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Data holders who refuse to share data pursuant to the first sub-paragraph shall notify all instances of refusal to the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 every 3 months. The Commission shall issue guidelines, in consultation with the European Data Innovation Board (EDIB), on the application of this paragraph, such as the assessment of serious economic damage, the critical economic sectors and the type of data in those critical economic sectors that typically may give rise to serious economic damage when unlawfully disclosed to third parties, and as regards risks for third country disclosure, on the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, and how to assess the control of economic operators by third-country entities.

Article 4 in the whole Data Act

How each paragraph has changed

Show the statuses
What each text would do to the law in force
Paragraph Commission19 Nov 2025Council10 Jun 2026Council18 Jun 2026Council3 Sep 2026Council2 Oct 2026Council22 Oct 2026 Parliamentamendments
Compared withlaw in forcethe proposal10 Jun text18 Jun text3 Sep text2 Oct text
6Paragraph 6 No change Unchanged No change Unchanged No change Unchanged No change Unchanged Amends , changed since 3 Sep Changed Amends Unchanged 1
8Paragraph 8 Amends Changed Amends , changed since the proposal Changed Amends , changed since 10 Jun Changed Amends Unchanged Amends , changed since 3 Sep Changed Amends , changed since 2 Oct Changed 29
Provisions only Parliament would add or change9 units Not in the law in force or this text In neither text Not in the law in force or this text In neither text Not in the law in force or this text In neither text Not in the law in force or this text In neither text Not in the law in force or this text In neither text Not in the law in force or this text In neither text 17

Each text against the law in force: ~Amends amends the law in force=No change leaves the law in force as it is— neither the law in force nor the text has it changed from the text before

Each text against the text before it: ~Changed wording changed=Unchanged same as the text before— in neither text

What each text does

  1. 19 Nov 2025 Commission proposalCOM(2025) 837 Amends Amends paragraph 8. Article 4 in this text
  2. 5 Jun 2026 JURI draft opinion · Brando Benifei (rapporteur)JURI-PA-789142 1 amendment to this article. Amendments in this document
  3. 8 Jun 2026 IMCO draft opinion · Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)IMCO-PA-789877 4 amendments to this article. Amendments in this document
  4. 10 Jun 2026 Council textST 10426/26 Changed Changes paragraph 8. Article 4 in this text
  5. 18 Jun 2026 Council textST 10677/26 Changed Changes paragraph 8. Article 4 in this text
  6. 29 Jun 2026 JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinionJURI-AM-790236 6 amendments to this article. Amendments in this document
  7. 16 Jul 2026 IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinionIMCO-AM-790905 9 amendments to this article. Amendments in this document
  8. 27 Jul 2026 ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft reportCJ72-AM-791071 27 amendments to this article. Amendments in this document
  9. 3 Sep 2026 Council textST 12535/26 Unchanged Same as the text before. Article 4 in this text
  10. 2 Oct 2026 Council textST 13886/26 Changed Changes paragraphs 6 and 8. Article 4 in this text
  11. 22 Oct 2026 Council textST 14756/26 Changed Changes paragraph 8. Article 4 in this text

Paragraph 6

Changed by the Council on 2 October

Parliament amendments 1

1 proposes alternative wording.

  1. 614 Alternative Axel VossEPP · ITRE–LIBE “Trade secrets shall be preserved and shall not be disclosed without the consent of their respective trade secret holder."”

    3 a. Article 4 - paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:

    6. Trade secrets shall be preserved and shall be disclosed only where the data holder and the user take all necessary measures prior to the disclosure to preserve their confidentiality in particular regarding third parties. The data holder or, where they are not the same person, the trade secret holder shall identify the data which are protected as trade secrets, including in the relevant metadata, and shall agree with the user proportionate technical and organisational measures necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the shared data, in particular in relation to third parties, such as model contractual terms, confidentiality agreements, strict access protocols, technical standards and the application of codes of conduct.Trade secrets shall be preserved and shall not be disclosed without the consent of their respective trade secret holder."

    Justification

    The amendments ensure that Data Act access rights do not override trade secrets, IP or EU cybersecurity objectives. Industrial and IoT data can reveal know-how, algorithms, control logic, production methods or R&D results when combined, sequenced or analysed in bulk. Disclosure without the trade secret holder’s consent would weaken innovation, expose EU manufacturers to unfair competition and security risks, and reduce trust in data sharing, while preserving coherence with the Trade Secrets Directive, NIS2 and the Cyber Resilience Act.

    Tabled by
    Axel Voss
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 6
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 6

Paragraph 8

Changed by the Commission · changed by the Council on 10 June · changed on 18 June · changed on 2 October · changed on 22 October

Parliament amendments 29

2 would delete the wording and 27 propose alternative wording. Deletion amendments come from EPP, and from the IMCO rapporteur’s draft opinion.

By political group; co-sponsored amendments count for each group
TypeThe LeftS&DGreens/EFARenewEPPECRPfERapporteur
− Deletion····1··1
~ Alternative123310721

By political group

  • − Deletion EPP 1 Rapporteur 1
  • ~ Alternative The Left 1 S&D 2 Greens/EFA 3 Renew 3 EPP 10 ECR 7 PfE 2 Rapporteur 1

Show

  1. 26 Alternative Brando Benifei (rapporteur)Rapporteur · JURI “only be disclosed provided that all specific necessary measures are taken to preserve”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.’;Trade secrets shall only be disclosed provided that all specific necessary measures are taken to preserve the confidentiality of trade secrets in particular with respect to third parties. The data holder and the user can agree measures to preserve the confidentiality of the shared data, in particular in relation to third parties. The Commission shall issue guidance, in consultation with the European Data Innovation Board (EDIB), on the application of this paragraph, such as the assessment of serious economic damage, and the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries.’;

    Justification

    This amendment restores the original balancing logic of the Data Act, under which trade secrets should primarily be protected through appropriate confidentiality safeguards rather than broad refusal rights. It aims to preserve access to data while ensuring proportionate protection of legitimate commercial interests and improving legal certainty through guidance at Union level.

    Rapporteur
    Brando Benifei
    Group
    Rapporteur
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  2. 38 Deletion Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO Deletes the Commission’s wording

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Rapporteur
    Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    Rapporteur
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  3. 166 Alternative Emil RadevEPP · JURI “shall issue guidance in consultation with the stakeholders, on the application of this paragraph”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay.Where the data holder who is a trade secret holder finds that, the data requested may result in the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third party, that data holder may refuse a request for access to the specific data in question. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competentuser authorityrequesting designatedthe pursuantdata. toThe ArticleCommission 37shall issue guidance in consultation with the stakeholders, on the application of this paragraph.;

    Justification

    This amendment strengthens the protection of trade secrets by allowing data holders to refuse access where there is a risk of unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of confidential business information. It helps safeguard innovation, competitiveness and sensitive commercial assets, while providing additional guidance for the consistent application of the provision.

    Tabled by
    Emil Radev
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  4. 167 Alternative Laurence FarrengRenew · JURI “shall first propose to the user specific technical and organisational measures to preserve the confidentiality of the trade secrets in question. The…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder shall first propose to the user specific technical and organisational measures to preserve the confidentiality of the trade secrets in question. The user and data holder shall engage in good faith negotiations to reach agreement on such measures within a reasonable timeframe. The data holder may only refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question if no mutually acceptable measures can be agreed. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37, specifying the measures proposed and the reasons why no agreement could be reached.;

    Tabled by
    Laurence Farreng
    Group
    Renew
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  5. 168 Alternative David CormandGreens/EFA · JURI “’ Decisions regarding refusal to grant access to the concerned data shall be subject to review. This review shall be carried out by an independent…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure, notably to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse withhold or, as the case may be, suspend the sharing of data identified as trade secrets on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;’ Decisions regarding refusal to grant access to the concerned data shall be subject to review. This review shall be carried out by an independent authority. The authority shall act transparently towards the requesting user or recipient. It shall also provide effective redress.

    Tabled by
    David Cormand
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  6. 169 Alternative Mario MantovaniECR · JURI “The refusal shall be reviewed by the competent authority or another independent dispute settlement body pursuant to this Regulation.”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration must prove that the refusal is necessary and proportionate and shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries,and the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay and shall contain detailed, verifiable and evidence-based reasoning justifying the refusal. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37. The refusal shall be reviewed by the competent authority or another independent dispute settlement body pursuant to this Regulation.’;

    Justification

    The proposed extension of the trade secrets safeguard, which is intended to guard against the risk of trade secrets being disclosed to third countries, provides further grounds for refusal which run the risk of undermining the objectives of the Data Act by allowing original equipment manufacturers to systematically limit SMEs from accessing data. SMEs often lack the wherewithal to assess complex corporate structures or demonstrate that their requests are devoid of risk. The burden of proof should continue to be with the data holder; safeguards should be applied restrictively, and refusals should be duly substantiated and subject to independent review.

    Tabled by
    Mario Mantovani
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  7. 170 Alternative Tobiasz Bocheński +1ECR · JURI “In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case or categorial basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  8. 227 Alternative David CormandGreens/EFA · IMCO “Trade secrets shall only be disclosed provided that all specific necessary measures are taken to preserve the confidentiality of trade secrets in…”

    8. Trade secrets shall only be disclosed provided that all specific necessary measures are taken to preserve the confidentiality of trade secrets in particular with respect to third parties. The data holder and the user can agree measures to preserve the confidentiality of the shared data, in particular in relation to third parties. The Commission shall issue guidance, in consultation with the European Data Innovation Board (EDIB), on the application of this paragraph, such as the assessment of serious economic damage, and the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries. Trade secret shall not be used as a pretext to deny legitimate access to data subjects and regulatory bodies. Any refusal of access must constitute a measure of last resort. Before refusing access, the data controller must offer a viable and secure alternative. This alternative must guarantee legitimate data use while ensuring the non-disclosure of trade secrets. Such alternatives may include confidentiality agreements, restricted access protocols subject to regular audits, technical measures for data aggregation or anonymization, technical architectures and standards that preserve confidentiality. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to notably third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refusewithhold or, as the case may be, suspend the sharing of data identified as trade secrets on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; Decisions regarding refusal shall be subject to review by an independent authority that will act transparently towards the requesting user or recipient and provide effective redress.

    Tabled by
    David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  9. 228 Alternative Virginie JoronPfE · IMCO “Data holders shall not be required to undertake a comprehensive assessment of foreign legal systems, enforcement practices, or international law in…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrateestablish on reasonable grounds that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or of industrial, strategic or sensitive data whose disclosure would be likely to cause damage to economic security, privacy or law and order, or that the disclosure of those data or of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, including because of the likely onward transmission of data to those entities, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstrationassessment shall be dulyreasonably substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, the chain of onward transmission of data that may reasonably be foreseen, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. Data holders shall not be required to undertake a comprehensive assessment of foreign legal systems, enforcement practices, or international law in order to rely on this paragraph. In particular, small and medium-sized enterprises should be entitled to rely on publicly available information and generally recognised risks when assessing the likelihood of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.’;

    Tabled by
    Virginie Joron
    Group
    PfE
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  10. 229 Alternative Piotr MüllerECR · IMCO “In circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder finds that, the data requested may result in disclosure of trade secrets to the…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstratefinds that, despite the technicaldata andrequested organisationalmay measuresresult taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that thein disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competentparty authorityrequesting designatedthe pursuant to Article 37data.;

    Tabled by
    Piotr Müller
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
Show 19 more amendments
  1. 230 Alternative Arba KokalariEPP · IMCO “Where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, whereWhere the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay.The refusal shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Arba Kokalari
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  2. 231 Alternative Sophia KircherEPP · IMCO “secrets in particular where the disclosure of trade secrets to the third party poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, whereWhere the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstratefinds that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the user requesting the data designated pursuant; The Commission shall consult stakeholders and adopt guidelines on the application of paragraph 4(8). These shall identify specific third-country jurisdictions and types of data or practices that inherently pose a high risk to trade secrets in particular where the disclosure of trade secrets to the third party poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law. The Commission shall provide a simplified template based on the list of objective criteria to help data holders to substantiate 'serious economic damage,' and where access may be granted even if data is highly sensitive and under what conditions.

    Tabled by
    Sophia Kircher
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  3. 232 Alternative Morten Løkkegaard +2Renew · IMCO “When assessing such risk, due account shall be taken of the strategic value of the data, the possibility of reverse engineering, the protection of…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. When assessing such risk, due account shall be taken of the strategic value of the data, the possibility of reverse engineering, the protection of intellectual property rights and the potential impact on the competitiveness of Union undertakings. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Justification

    A well-functioning Single Market depends on both the free flow of data and effective protection of trade secrets and intellectual property. This amendment provides greater legal certainty by clarifying how economic risks should be assessed, while ensuring that mandatory data-sharing obligations do not weaken the competitiveness of Union undertakings or reduce incentives to innovate and invest across the Single Market.

    Tabled by
    Morten Løkkegaard, Svenja Hahn, Jeannette Baljeu
    Group
    Renew
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  4. 592 Deletion Axel VossEPP · ITRE–LIBE Deletes the Commission’s wording

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Justification

    The amendments ensure that Data Act access rights do not override trade secrets, IP or EU cybersecurity objectives. Industrial and IoT data can reveal know-how, algorithms, control logic, production methods or R&D results when combined, sequenced or analysed in bulk. Disclosure without the trade secret holder’s consent would weaken innovation, expose EU manufacturers to unfair competition and security risks, and reduce trust in data sharing, while preserving coherence with the Trade Secrets Directive, NIS2 and the Cyber Resilience Act.

    Tabled by
    Axel Voss
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  5. 593 Alternative Elena Sancho Murillo +6S&D · ITRE–LIBE “The competent authority shall review the substantiation provided and issue a binding decision within sixty calendar days of receipt of the…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate with sufficient evidence that the product data and related service data constiute a trade secret within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive 2016/943, that such trade secrets cannot be eliminated or sufficiently mitigated through design measures pursutant to Aritcle 3(1), and, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious and demonstrable economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent user or trade secret protection compared to that under Union law. For the purposes of this Regulation, that'serious economic damage' does not include normal competitive effects arising from lawful access under the Data Act. The data holder mayshall refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access toidentify the specific data inthat questionconstitutes a trade secret and shall not classify entire datasets as trade secrets. ThatAny such demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, suchverifiable asand specific evidence, taking into account, in particular, the enforceability of trade secretssecret protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requestedconcerned, the design measures applied pursuant to Article 3(1), and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. ItSuch demonstration shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;Where the data holder refuses to share specific data on the basis of trade secret protection, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 without undue delay and no later than five working days after communicating the refusal to the user. The competent authority shall review the substantiation provided and issue a binding decision within sixty calendar days of receipt of the notification. A refusal shall be permitted only on a case-by-case basis and shall be duly reasoned, proportionate and limited to the specific data strictly necessary to protect the trade secret. It shall not prejudice the rights of users under this Regulation. Any claim relating to third-country entities shall be supported by concrete evidence demonstrating a specific risk of unlawful access, use or disclosure. Access may be refused only where the data holder demonstrates, on the basis of objective and verifiable evidence, that disclosure would create a serious and specific risk of unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret that cannot be adequately mitigated through confidentiality measures, technical safeguards or contractual arrangements.

    Justification

    The amendment ensures that the trade secret safeguard remains an exceptional mechanism and cannot be used to undermine the Data Act’s objective of effective data access. It clarifies that data holders must demonstrate that the data concerned qualify as trade secrets under Article 2(18) of the Data Act and Article 2(1) of the Trade Secrets Directive, and that related risks cannot be adequately mitigated through the design obligations under Article 3(1) of the Data Act. This preserves a balance between protecting legitimate trade secrets and ensuring access to and use of data.

    Tabled by
    Elena Sancho Murillo, Marina Kaljurand, Brando Benifei, José Cepeda, Lina Gálvez, Francisco Assis, Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  6. 594 Alternative Michael McNamara +4Renew · ITRE–LIBE “The competent authority shall approve or reject the data holder’s refusal to share data pursuant to this paragraph based on a review of the evidence…”

    8. The Commission, in consultation with the European Data Innovation Board (EDIB) and representatives of data holders, users, and thrid-parties shall publish a list of high-risk sectors with regards to the disclosure of trade secrets. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or, in high-risk sectors, that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elementsevidence, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the verifable insufficiency of specific technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, the high likelihood of suffering serious economic damage, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 no later than five working days after the refusal was communicated to the user.; The competent authority shall approve or reject the data holder’s refusal to share data pursuant to this paragraph based on a review of the evidence submitted by the data holder, and provide in writing an explanation for its decision to the data holder and user within 60 calander days. The user has the right to be heard before the competent authority decides to approve or reject the data holder’s refusal to share data pursuant to this paragraph. The Commission shall issue guidelines, in consultation with the European Data Innovation Board (EDIB) and representatives of data holders, users, and third parties on the application of this paragraph, such as the assessment of serious economic damage, third-country entity direct or indirect control, and the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries.

    Tabled by
    Michael McNamara, Irena Joveva, Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Christophe Grudler
    Group
    Renew
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  7. 595 Alternative Julie Rechagneux +7ECR, PfE · ITRE–LIBE “Data holders shall not be required to undertake a comprehensive assessment of foreign legal systems, enforcement practices, or international law in…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrateestablish, on the basis of reasonable grounds that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets, or of industrial, strategic or sensitive data whose disclosure would be liable to harm economic security, privacy or public order, or create a serious risk to the cybersecurity of the connected product, related service or the data holder’s systems, or that the disclosure of tradesuch secrets to the userdata poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, including as a result of the foreseeable onward transmission of the data to such entities, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstrationassessment shall be dulyreasonably substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, the nature and seriousness of the cybersecurity risk, the reasonably foreseeable chain of onward transmission of the data, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. Data holders shall not be required to undertake a comprehensive assessment of foreign legal systems, enforcement practices, or international law in order to rely on this paragraph. In particular, small and medium-sized enterprises should be entitled to rely on publicly available information and generally recognised risks when assessing the likelihood of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Justification

    The right to refuse data sharing where disclosure would cause serious harm should not be confined to trade secrets in the strict sense. Industrial, strategic or sensitive data whose disclosure would be liable to harm the economic security of the Union, the privacy of natural persons or public order warrant equivalent protection. Furthermore, the evidentiary standard applicable to data holders should be calibrated so as to remain workable in practice: requiring a holder to demonstrate that serious damage is highly likely sets a threshold that is difficult to meet ex ante and risks depriving the safeguard of its effectiveness. The introduction of a reasonable grounds standard, together with a requirement that the assessment be reasonably substantiated on the basis of objective elements, preserves the case-by-case and duly reasoned nature of the refusal while ensuring that the safeguard is genuinely operable.

    Tabled by
    Julie Rechagneux, Mélanie Disdier, Aleksandar Nikolic, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Alexandre Varaut, Fabrice Leggeri, Marion Maréchal, Christophe Bay
    Group
    ECR, PfE
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – Paragraph 8
  8. 596 Alternative Aura Salla +5EPP · ITRE–LIBE “secrets in particular where the disclosure of trade secrets to the third party poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstratefinds that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, suchin asparticular the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the user requesting the data. The Commission shall consult stakeholders and adopt guidelines on the application of paragraph 4(8). These shall identify specific third-country jurisdictions and types of data or practices that inherently pose a high risk to trade secrets in particular where the disclosure of trade secrets to the third party poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law. The Commission shall provide a simplified template based on the list of objective criteria to help data holders to substantiate 'serious economic damage,' and where access may be granted even if data is highly sensitive and under what conditions.

    Tabled by
    Aura Salla, Niels Flemming Hansen, Ana Miguel Pedro, Adina Vălean, Andrea Wechsler, Christian Ehler
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  9. 597 Alternative Dario NardellaS&D · ITRE–LIBE “Where the request for access involves data reflecting the user’s economic activity, scale of operations and output, the data holder shall inform the…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; Where the request for access involves data reflecting the user’s economic activity, scale of operations and output, the data holder shall inform the user in advance of the request received, specifying the nature of the data requested, the identity of the applicant and the decisions taken regarding the activation of the refusal mechanism referred to in this paragraph. Upon a reasoned request from the user, the data holder shall activate the refusal mechanism for the part of the data which reflects the user’s economic activity, unless the data holder demonstrates in writing that the conditions set out in this paragraph are not met.

    Justification

    L’emendamento non altera l’impianto del meccanismo di rifiuto introdotto dalla proposta della Commissione, ma ne aggiunge due elementi complementari, che intervengono soltanto nel caso in cui la richiesta di accesso riguardi dati che riflettono l’attività e il dimensionamento economico dell’utente e delle sue produzioni. Il primo elemento è un obbligo informativo del detentore dei dati verso l’utente. Il secondo è il diritto dell’utente di richiedere l’attivazione del meccanismo di rifiuto per la parte dei dati che lo riguardano, con inversione dell’onere motivazionale a carico del detentore ove intenda non attivare il meccanismo. La distinzione tra dati riconducibili al funzionamento tecnico del prodotto e dati riconducibili all’attività economica dell’utente può essere oggetto degli orientamenti della Commissione, come previsto dal considerando 13 bis introdotto dall’Emendamento 5.

    Tabled by
    Dario Nardella
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – point 8
  10. 598 Alternative Francesco Torselli +1ECR · ITRE–LIBE “Where the request for access involves data reflecting the user’s economic activity, scale of operations and output, the data holder shall inform the…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; Where the request for access involves data reflecting the user’s economic activity, scale of operations and output, the data holder shall inform the user in advance of the request received, specifying the nature of the data requested, the identity of the applicant and the decisions taken regarding the activation of the refusal mechanism referred to in this paragraph. Upon a reasoned request from the user, the data holder shall activate the refusal mechanism for the part of the data which reflects the user’s economic activity, unless the data holder demonstrates in writing that the conditions set out in this paragraph are not met. (Our intention is to amend part of the text at the end of the article.)

    Tabled by
    Francesco Torselli, Paolo Inselvini
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – point 8
  11. 599 Alternative Diego Solier +2ECR · ITRE–LIBE “Where appropriate technical, organisational or contractual measures cannot reasonably ensure the effective protection of trade secrets or…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; Where appropriate technical, organisational or contractual measures cannot reasonably ensure the effective protection of trade secrets or confidential commercial information, the data holder shall not be required to disclose the relevant data. This Regulation shall set measures to prevent the disclosure of trade secrets where equivalent technical or contractual safeguards cannot reasonably ensure the protection of confidential commercial information.

    Tabled by
    Diego Solier, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Elena Donazzan
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  12. 600 Alternative Henrik DahlEPP · ITRE–LIBE “In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question.In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product.The assessment shall be based on the definition of trade secrets stated in Article 2 (1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council. ItThe refusal shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Henrik Dahl
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  13. 601 Alternative Alice Teodorescu Måwe +1EPP · ITRE–LIBE “In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question.In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product.The assessment shall be based on the definition of trade secrets stated in Article 2 (1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council. ItThe refusal shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Alice Teodorescu Måwe, Henrik Dahl
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  14. 602 Alternative Niels Flemming HansenEPP · ITRE–LIBE “In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question.In any circumstance, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder assesses a risk of disclosing trade secrets, the data holder may refuse a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product.The assessment shall be based on the definition of trade secrets stated in Article 2 (1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council. ItThe refusal shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Niels Flemming Hansen
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  15. 603 Alternative Tomas Tobé +2EPP · ITRE–LIBE “Where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, whereWhere the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay.The refusal shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Tabled by
    Tomas Tobé, Arba Kokalari, Jörgen Warborn
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  16. 604 Alternative João OliveiraThe Left · ITRE–LIBE “In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.

    Tabled by
    João Oliveira
    Group
    The Left
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  17. 605 Alternative Zala Černilec Tomašič +7EPP, ECR · ITRE–LIBE “Circumstances that invoke the right to refuse a request for access may also arise if the disclosure of such data would increase cybersecurity risks…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, such as the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; Circumstances that invoke the right to refuse a request for access may also arise if the disclosure of such data would increase cybersecurity risks affecting the security or resilience of the shared data, or the data holder’s network and information systems, connected products, or related services.

    Justification

    This amendment improves legal certainty by recognising cybersecurity as a valid ground to refuse data access where disclosure would demonstrably increase cyber risks or compromise the security of data, systems, products or services. It closes a gap in the Data Act, aligns it with the NIS2 Directive and Cyber Resilience Act, and allows refusal only where objectively justified, preserving data sharing while preventing avoidable cybersecurity risks.

    Tabled by
    Zala Černilec Tomašič, Jan Farský, Ondřej Krutílek, Tomáš Zdechovský, Henrik Dahl, Alexandr Vondra, Veronika Vrecionová, Lukas Mandl
    Group
    EPP, ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  18. 606 Alternative Damian BoeselagerGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “The data holder and the competent authority shall inform the user of their rights and the relevant procedure under paragraph 7.”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious and irreparable economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, suchin asparticular the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.; The data holder and the competent authority shall inform the user of their rights and the relevant procedure under paragraph 7.

    Tabled by
    Damian Boeselager on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8
  19. 607 Alternative Pilar del Castillo VeraEPP · ITRE–LIBE “In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and…”

    8. In exceptional circumstances, where the data holder who is a trade secret holder is able to demonstrate that, despite the technical and organisational measures taken by the user pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Article, it is highly likely to suffer serious economic damage from the disclosure of trade secrets or that the disclosure of trade secrets to the user poses a high risk of unlawful acquisition, use, or disclosure to third country entities, or entities established in the Union under the direct or indirect control of such entities, which are subject to jurisdictions offering weaker or non-equivalent protection compared to that under Union law, that data holder may refuse on a case-by-case basis a request for access to the specific data in question. That demonstration shall be duly substantiated on the basis of objective elements, suchin asparticular the enforceability of trade secrets protection in third countries, the nature and level of confidentiality of the data requested, and the uniqueness and novelty of the connected product. It shall be provided in writing to the user without undue delay. Where the data holder refuses to share data pursuant to this paragraph, it shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37.;

    Justification

    Article 4(8), as currently drafted in the Data Act, establishes an exhaustive framework for demonstrating, based on objective elements, the risk of serious economic damage resulting from the disclosure of trade secrets. Replacing ‘in particular’ with ‘such as’ would transform that framework into an open-ended list of criteria, allowing reliance on additional unspecified elements and broadening the grounds for refusal. To preserve legal certainty, the original wording should be retained.

    Tabled by
    Pilar del Castillo Vera
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4(8)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8

Provisions only Parliament amendments would add or change

17 amendments on 9 units the Commission proposal leaves unchanged

Paragraph 4Not amended by the Commission

  1. 225 Alternative David CormandGreens/EFA · IMCO “4a. The user shall have the right to determine whether, and to what extent, product data or related service data generated on the user’s local…”

    2b. in Article 4, a new paragraph is introduced after paragraph 4: 4. Data holders shall not make the exercise of choices or rights under this Article by the user unduly difficult, including by offering choices to the user in a non-neutral manner or by subverting or impairing the autonomy, decision-making or choices of the user via the structure, design, function or manner of operation of a user digital interface or a part thereof. 4a. The user shall have the right to determine whether, and to what extent, product data or related service data generated on the user’s local network is transmitted beyond that network to the manufacturer, the data holder, or any third party. The data holder shall provide the user with a readily accessible technical means to exercise or withdraw this determination at any time, free of charge, without this affecting the user’s access rights under Article 3 or this Article. This paragraph shall not restrict processing of data strictly necessary for: (a) cybersecurity and the delivery of security updates; (b) compliance with a legal obligation to which the manufacturer or data holder is subject; or (c) a safety recall."

    Tabled by
    David Cormand on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 4
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 4

Paragraph 7Not amended by the Commission

  1. 618 Alternative Axel VossEPP · ITRE–LIBE “3 b. Article 4 - paragraph 7 is deleted. ""”

    73 b. Where there is no agreement on the necessary measures referred to in paragraph 6, or if the user fails to implement the measures agreed pursuant to paragraph 6 or undermines the confidentiality of the trade secrets, the data holder may withhold or, as the case may be, suspend the sharing of data identified as trade secrets.Article 4 - paragraph 7 is deleted. The decision of the data holder shall be duly substantiated and provided in writing to the user without undue delay. In such cases, the data holder shall notify the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 that it has withheld or suspended data sharing and identify which measures have not been agreed or implemented and, where relevant, which trade secrets have had their confidentiality undermined.""

    Justification

    The amendments ensure that Data Act access rights do not override trade secrets, IP or EU cybersecurity objectives. Industrial and IoT data can reveal know-how, algorithms, control logic, production methods or R&D results when combined, sequenced or analysed in bulk. Disclosure without the trade secret holder’s consent would weaken innovation, expose EU manufacturers to unfair competition and security risks, and reduce trust in data sharing, while preserving coherence with the Trade Secrets Directive, NIS2 and the Cyber Resilience Act.

    Tabled by
    Axel Voss
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 7
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 7

Paragraph 8a (new)New3 proposals

  1. 39 Addition Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO “The data holder shall not rely on this Article to refuse data access on the basis of generalised assumptions concerning a third country, ownership…” numbered 8a

    8a.The data holder shall not rely on this Article to refuse data access on the basis of generalised assumptions concerning a third country, ownership structure, technology provider, or category of recipient. The data holder shall not engage in any behaviour that undermines effective compliance with the data access obligations under this Regulation regardless of whether that behaviour is of a contractual, commercial or technical nature, or of any other nature, or consists in the use of behavioural techniques or interface design.

    Justification

    Additional safeguard for effective compliance inspired on art 13 para 4 of the Digital Markets Act.

    Rapporteur
    Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    Rapporteur
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8a (new)
    Document
    IMCO draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8 a (new)
  2. 233 Addition Piotr MüllerECR · IMCO “A data holder may use any readily available data that is non-personal data. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the…” numbered 8a

    8a.A data holder may use any readily available data that is non-personal data. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the economic situation, assets and production methods of, or the use by, the user in any other manner that could undermine the commercial position of that user on the markets in which the user is active

    Justification

    Frees businesses to use non-personal product data without concluding a separate contract with every user, removing a paperwork obligation that serves no protective purpose

    Tabled by
    Piotr Müller
    Group
    ECR
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8a (new)
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8 a (new)
  3. 610 Addition Elena Sancho Murillo +6S&D · ITRE–LIBE “The data holder shall not rely on this Article to refuse data access on the basis of generalised assumptions concerning a third country, ownership…” numbered 8a

    8a.The data holder shall not rely on this Article to refuse data access on the basis of generalised assumptions concerning a third country, ownership structure, technology provider, or category of recipient.

    The data holder shall not engage in any behaviour that undermines effective compliance with the data access obligations under this Regulation regardless of whether that behaviour is of a contractual, commercial or technical nature, or of any other nature, or consists in the use of behavioural techniques or interface design.

    Tabled by
    Elena Sancho Murillo, Marina Kaljurand, Brando Benifei, José Cepeda, Lina Gálvez, Francisco Assis, Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8a (new)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8a (new)

Paragraph 8b (new)New2 proposals

  1. 40 Addition Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO “Before refusing access under paragraph 8, the data holder shall assess whether the identified risk can be effectively addressed through proportionate…” numbered 8b

    8b.Before refusing access under paragraph 8, the data holder shall assess whether the identified risk can be effectively addressed through proportionate technical, organisational, contractual, or secure-access measures, including access in a secure processing environment, partial access, aggregation, confidentiality commitments, or other safeguards that enable the user to exercise the rights provided for in this Regulation. Refusal shall be used only where such measures would be insufficient to address a duly substantiated and specific risk.

    Rapporteur
    Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    Rapporteur
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8b (new)
    Document
    IMCO draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8 b (new)
  2. 611 Addition Elena Sancho Murillo +6S&D · ITRE–LIBE “Before refusing access under paragraph 8, the data holder shall assess whether the identified risk can be effectively addressed through proportionate…” numbered 8b

    8b.Before refusing access under paragraph 8, the data holder shall assess whether the identified risk can be effectively addressed through proportionate technical, organisational, contractual, or secure-access measures, including access in a secure processing environment, partial access, aggregation, confidentiality commitments, or other safeguards that enable the user to exercise the rights provided for in this Regulation. Refusal shall be used only where such measures would be insufficient to address a duly substantiated and specific risk.

    Tabled by
    Elena Sancho Murillo, Marina Kaljurand, Brando Benifei, José Cepeda, Lina Gálvez, Francisco Assis, Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8b (new)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8b (new)

Paragraph 8c (new)New2 proposals

  1. 41 Addition Alex Agius Saliba (rapporteur)Rapporteur · IMCO “The review of the data holder’s refusal to provide data access by the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 referred to in paragraph…” numbered 8c

    8c.The review of the data holder’s refusal to provide data access by the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 referred to in paragraph 8 shall be available through an expedited procedure which shall not be later than a month in complex cases. The competent authority shall assess the necessity, proportionality, evidence and non-discriminatory nature of the refusal.

    Rapporteur
    Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    Rapporteur
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8c (new)
    Document
    IMCO draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8 c (new)
  2. 612 Addition Elena Sancho Murillo +6S&D · ITRE–LIBE “The review of the data holder’s refusal to provide data access by the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 referred to in paragraph…” numbered 8c

    8c.The review of the data holder’s refusal to provide data access by the competent authority designated pursuant to Article 37 referred to in paragraph 8 shall be available through an expedited procedure which shall not be later than a month in complex cases. The competent authority shall assess the necessity, proportionality, evidence and non-discriminatory nature of the refusal.

    Tabled by
    Elena Sancho Murillo, Marina Kaljurand, Brando Benifei, José Cepeda, Lina Gálvez, Francisco Assis, Alex Agius Saliba
    Group
    S&D
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 8c (new)
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 8c (new)

Paragraph 9Not amended by the Commission

  1. 613 Alternative Bart Groothuis +6Renew · ITRE–LIBE “Article 4 paragraph 9 is deleted ""”

    93a. Without prejudice to a user’s right to seek redress at any stage before a court or tribunal of a Member State, a user wishing to challenge a data holder’s decision to refuse or to withhold or suspend data sharing pursuant to paragraphs 7 and 8 may: (a)lodge, in accordance with Article 37(5), point (b), a complaint with the competent authority, which shall, without undue delay, decide whether and under which conditions data sharing is to start or resume; orArticle 4 paragraph 9 is deleted ""

    Tabled by
    Bart Groothuis, Ivars Ijabs, Morten Løkkegaard, Svenja Hahn, Andreas Glück, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Ana Vasconcelos
    Group
    Renew
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 9
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 9

Paragraph 10Not amended by the Commission

  1. 617 Addition Damian BoeselagerGreens/EFA · ITRE–LIBE “In Article 4, paragraph 10 is deleted.” numbered 3a

    Effectnew Parliament proposal instruction expressly deletes existing law

    3a.In Article 4, paragraph 10 is deleted.

    Tabled by
    Damian Boeselager on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group
    Group
    Greens/EFA
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 10
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 10

Paragraph 13Not amended by the Commission4 proposals

  1. 171 Addition Emil RadevEPP · JURI “A data holder is entitled to shall only use any readily available data that is non-personal data on the basis of a contract with the user. Such use…”

    8a. Article 4, paragraph 13 is amended as follows

    13.A data holder is entitled to shall only use any readily available data that is non-personal data on the basis of a contract with the user. Such use shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and shall comply with Union and national law on the protection of trade secrets and intellectual property rights. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the economic situation, assets and production methods of, or the use by, the user in any other manner that could undermine the commercial position of that user on the markets in which the user is active.

    Justification

    This amendment clarifies that the use of non-personal data does not require additional user consent or contractual arrangements. It enhances legal certainty, reduces unnecessary administrative burdens and facilitates the effective use of non-personal data in line with the objectives of the Regulation.

    Tabled by
    Emil Radev
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 13
    Document
    JURI amendments 69–296 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 13
  2. 234 Alternative Sophia KircherEPP · IMCO “Such use shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and shall comply with Union and national law”

    13. A data holder shall only use any readily available data that is non-personal data on the basis of a contract with the user.A data holder is entitled to use any readily available data that is non-personal data. Such use shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and shall comply with Union and national law on the protection of trade secrets and intellectual property rights. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the economic situation, assets and production methods of, or the use by, the user in any other manner that could undermine the commercial position of that user on the markets in which the user is active."

    Tabled by
    Sophia Kircher
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 13
    Document
    IMCO amendments 125–328 to the draft opinion
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 13
  3. 609 Addition Aura Salla +7EPP · ITRE–LIBE “A data holder is entitled to use any readily available data that is non-personal data. Such use shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU)…”

    8a. Article 4, paragraph 13 is amended as follows

    13.A data holder is entitled to use any readily available data that is non-personal data. Such use shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and shall comply with Union and national law on the protection of trade secrets and intellectual property rights. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the economic situation, assets and production methods of, or the use by, the user in any other manner that could undermine the commercial position of that user on the markets in which the user is active.'

    Tabled by
    Aura Salla, Niels Flemming Hansen, Ana Miguel Pedro, Adina Vălean, Henrik Dahl, Andrea Wechsler, Pekka Toveri, Christian Ehler
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 13
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 13
  4. 619 Alternative Axel VossEPP · ITRE–LIBE “In Article 4, paragraph 13 is deleted. ""”

    133c. A data holder shall only use any readily available data that is non-personal data on the basis of a contract with the user.In Article 4, paragraph 13 is deleted. A data holder shall not use such data to derive insights about the economic situation, assets and production methods of, or the use by, the user in any other manner that could undermine the commercial position of that user on the markets in which the user is active.""

    Justification

    Deleting Article 4(13) and (14) restores data holders’ ability to use non-personal data generated by connected products for diagnostics, maintenance, safety, cybersecurity, quality assurance, R&D, AI development and product improvement. The current rules create legal uncertainty, contractual friction and barriers for upstream operators and OEM-component partnerships. Deletion simplifies the Data Act, supports industrial competitiveness and leaves safeguards for data protection, trade secrets and IP intact.

    Tabled by
    Axel Voss
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 13
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 c (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 13

Paragraph 14Not amended by the Commission2 proposals

  1. 615 Addition Aura Salla +4EPP · ITRE–LIBE ‘Data holders may make available non-personal product data to third parties for legitimate commercial or non-commercial purposes;’

    3a. In Article 4, paragraph 14 is replaced by the following;

    ‘Data holders may make available non-personal product data to third parties for legitimate commercial or non-commercial purposes;’

    Tabled by
    Aura Salla, Niels Flemming Hansen, Ana Miguel Pedro, Adina Vălean, Christian Ehler
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 14
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 14
  2. 620 Alternative Axel VossEPP · ITRE–LIBE “Article 4 - paragraph 14 is deleted. ""”

    143d. Data holders shall not make available non-personal product data to third parties for commercial or non-commercial purposes other than the fulfilment of their contract with the user.Article 4 - paragraph 14 is deleted. Where relevant, data holders shall contractually bind third parties not to further share data received from them.""

    Justification

    Deleting Article 4(13) and (14) restores data holders’ ability to use non-personal data generated by connected products for diagnostics, maintenance, safety, cybersecurity, quality assurance, R&D, AI development and product improvement. The current rules create legal uncertainty, contractual friction and barriers for upstream operators and OEM-component partnerships. Deletion simplifies the Data Act, supports industrial competitiveness and leaves safeguards for data protection, trade secrets and IP intact.

    Tabled by
    Axel Voss
    Group
    EPP
    Targets
    Data Act Article 4 – paragraph 14
    Document
    ITRE–LIBE amendments 527–776 to the draft report
    Printed header
    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 d (new) / Regulation (EU) 2023/2854 / Article 4 – paragraph 14