The move has eased difficulties for the plane makers, which have been suffering significantly from the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows that transatlantic trade tensions have begun to cool down.

The US and the EU have imposed tit-for-tat tariffs in the 16-year-old dispute over their governments’ subsidies for European aircraft maker Airbus and US rival Boeing. Accordingly, the US levied a 15% duty on imported Airbus planes from 2019 after the years-long dispute forced the two sides to submit the case to the World Trade Organisation (WTO). After that, the EU retaliated against the US with a similar tax rate on Boeing planes. The “tariff war” between the two sides also spread to wine, whiskey and other goods.

However, President of the European Commission (EC) Ursula von der Leyen recently announced that the EU and the US have agreed to temporarily cease retaliatory tariffs regarding the Airbus-Boeing dispute for four months.

The decision by leaders on the two coasts of the Atlantic Ocean to stop tit-for-tat tariffs on airplanes and other commodities has also helped to alleviate difficulties facing aircraft manufacturers in the context of the pandemic. At the end of February, CEO of European aircraft manufacturer Guillaume Faury called on the two sides to stop imposing retaliatory tariffs, stating that the EU-US “tax war” has exacerbated the losses caused by the COVID-19 crisis on both sides. Airbus statistics showed that the company posted a net loss of US$1.3 billion in 2020, while Boeing also experienced disappointing business results with total damages of up to US$11.9 billion last year.

According to analysts, the EU-US “truce” in the aircraft subsidy war shows that after the US has a new president, tensions in the transatlantic trade relations have begun to cool down. The US-EU trade ties constantly plummeted under former US President Donald Trump’s administration, with Washington imposing tariffs on US$7.5 billion of EU exports.

In reply, the EU levied tariffs on US$4 billion of goods imported from the US. Therefore, European leaders have responded positively to the aforementioned “ceasefire” between the two sides. Over the weekend, the French commerce ministry welcomed the EU-US agreement, hailing it as the first step in the process of de-escalation. EU member states will consider introducing new regulations on public subsidies for the aerospace sector.

In the context of the US facing unprecedented severe challenges and the EU struggling to overcome the economic and pandemic crisis, the cooling down of trade tensions between the two sides is significant to the promotion of regional and global economic recovery. In addition, the suspension of tit-for-tat tariff imposition also paves the way for the US and EU to restore and develop many other global cooperation contents on security and climate change response, which had been stagnated or interrupted during the term of former US President Donald Trump.

from the sounds-like-it dept

I’ve been so focused of late on issues related to Section 230 in the US, that I’ve had barely any time to devote to the Digital Services Act in the EU, which is the EU’s ongoing efforts to rewrite intermediary law in the EU. The reports I have followed have been a mix of concerns, with the admission that it at least appeared that EU politicians were trying to get a good grasp on the issues and trade-offs and not rush in with a totally horrible plan. That doesn’t mean the end result is good, but so far it does not appear to be totally disconnected from reality, as with many similar proposals we’ve seen around the globe.

Joan Barata has a good report looking at the the current state of intermediary liability in the latest DSA proposal and notes that it’s… kind of a mess. Basically, as is often the case with intermediary liability laws, very few policymakers have experience with the actual issues, and thus they can’t take into account how various provisions will actually work in practice. Frequently that means that proposals are worded vaguely, and no one will really know what they mean until after a series of lengthy, confusing, and expensive court decisions.

As Barata notes, the DSA appears to retain the basic liability protections that have existed for the last two decades in the EU in the form of the E-commerce Directive (which is weaker than Section 230’s protections in the US, but are roughly equivalent in saying that websites should not be held liable for 3rd party content). The big difference with the E-commerce Directive is that websites do need to remove content “upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness” of “illegal activities.” Of course, what exactly is meant by “obtaining actual knowledge or awareness” becomes a tricky question at times and did involve some lawsuits.

The DSA, though, moves the liability situation further away from Section 230 and more to a DMCA style “safe harbor” situation, by establishing that knowledge can be obtained through “notices”:

Apart from the provisions included in Article 5, Article 14(3) establishes that notice and action mechanisms fulfilling certain criteria give rise to actual knowledge or awareness.

The DSA tries to avoid the classic “moderator’s dilemma” issue by saying that even though knowledge or awareness could make you liable, you don’t necessarily lose your liability protections if you carry out your own investigations:

Article 6 clarifies that intermediaries may not lose their liability protections “solely because they carry out voluntary own initiative investigations or other activities aimed at detecting, identifying and removing, or disabling of access to, illegal content, or take the necessary measures to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation”.

But what does that mean in practice? You can lose the protections if you know about illegal stuff on your website, but you don’t lose them if you are doing your own investigation. But at what point does finding stuff during your own investigation magically morph into knowledge or awareness? Well, the answer seems… contradictory. Basically, it sounds like the current draft of the DSA hangs an awful lot of weight on the word “solely.” If illegal content is discovered “solely” via an investigation, then a site might retain its protections — but if that same content is discovered in any other way, then the site may have knowledge and face liability. This… is going to be confusing.

And, again, this tends to be the problem with all of these proposals. They want to encourage sites to moderate to clean up bad stuff, but if they mandate liability for having knowledge of bad stuff, you incentivize less searching. But now you are still left in a weird, twisted position, where you say “okay, you can search, but if you find stuff, you’re no longer liable for it… unless you also have separate knowledge of it.” And how do you manage that?

This is actually one of the many reasons why — despite all the criticism it receives — Section 230 gets the balance right. It gives websites a free hand in moderating content, but does so in a way that many, many other forces come into play in pressuring the company to be a good actor in the space. Public pressure, user concerns, media coverage, and advertiser pressure, all serve to push websites to improve their moderation practices. Too many people, however, think that without a law mandating such things, nothing happens. That’s wrong. We’re seeing every website continually work to create better policies not because of the risk of some confusing and potentially very costly law, but because they don’t want their site to be a dumpster fire of awful.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: confusion, digital services act, dsa, e-commerce directive, eu, intermediary liability, knowledge, monitoring, notices, section 230

Rabat – EU parliamentarian Tomas Zdechovsky has listed the positive development in the Western Sahara conflict, recalling the US recent decision to recognize Morocco’s sovereignty over the region.

In a recent written question to the EU, the member of the European Parliament said the situation in Arica “has changed significantly in recent months.”

Zdechovsky recalled the diplomatic rapprochement between Morocco and Israel, as well as the US’ recognition of Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara; he also cited EU countries that support Morocco’s position.

He said some EU member states, including Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, and Poland have expressed support for Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara.

<p>“Is the EEAS [European External Action Services] considering moving in a similar direction?” the MP asked.

Several countries from all continents have publicly embraced Morocco’s position, describing its Autonomy Plan as a credible and serious solution to end the Sahara conflict.

On December 10, former US president Donald Trump made a historic decision by recognizing Morocco’s sovereignty over the region.

Reflecting the growing, unwavering international support for Morocco’sstance is that about 20 countries have in recent months opened their consulates in the country’s southern provinces. 

The latest country to join the pro-Morocco momentum was Jordan, which opened its consulate in the region of Laayoune on Thursday.

Jordan also reiterated support for Morocco’s autonomy initiative, saying it the most realistic route to a lasting solution in Western Sahara.

Morocco submitted its Autonomy Plan to the UN Security Council in 2007. The Moroccan initiative suggests making Western Sahara a semi-autonomous region that remains under Morocco’s sovereignty.

The plan will allow the region’s inhabitants to manage their social, economic, and political affairs while Morocco handles defense and diplomacy. 

The Western Sahara region is witnessing rapid socio-economic and political transformations, with more countries signing investment deals and development projects projected to make the southern provinces a regional economic hub.

With the EU steering clear of committing to a clear position on the Sahara question, Morocco has called on the European body to join the international trend and support the positive dynamics underway in Morocco’s southern provinces.

In February, Morocco’s Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita called on the EU to come out of its comfort zone and support the growing international consensus on the Sahara conflict. 

The official said that more countries are supporting Morocco’s autonomy initiative as the surest way out of the decades-long political impasse in Western Sahara.

“This is not an isolated position, but a trend at the level of the international community.”

He recalled that  the process has gone “round and round for years,” recalling that the conflict has an impact on the situation of the Sahel region — where terror organizations are active in the region.

“Today, the train will leave. Is Europe going to remain passive or contribute to this dynamic? Bourita asked.

Several EU officials have since called on the European body to support Morocco’s position.

Louis Michel, Belgium’s former Foreign Minister and Jacques Brotchi, the  Honorary president of the Belgian Senate, released a joint statement in February to support Morocco’s autonomy proposal as the most viable way to end the Sahara dispute.

“Now we can see that the world is moving slowly but surely towards the recognition of the sovereignty of Morocco over Western Sahara, a positive move for geographic, political and geo-strategic reasons,” the joint statement reads.

  <div class="paywall" readability="13.634033613445">  <p>Asked about an article in which his Brexit adviser David Frost says the <a href="https://www.livemint.com/news/world/eu-seeks-access-to-us-produced-astrazeneca-vaccines-report-11615026539151.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">EU</a> should "shake off any remaining ill will towards us for leaving".</p>       <p>"I think this is one of those issues we were always bound to have in the early stages of our new relationship with our friends in the EU and the various technical issues that we are going to iron out," he told reporters.</p>       <p>"I am full of optimism about the future and the partnership that we are building." </p>     <input type="hidden" id="iframecount" value="0"/>  <p><em>This story has been published from a wire agency feed without modifications to the text.</em></p>   <div class="newslettersub_outsidesso_11615120854713" readability="6">  <div class="outsideSso clearfix" id="outsideSso_11615120854713" readability="8"> <p>Subscribe to <strong>Mint Newsletters</strong></p> <div class="inputSecArea clearfix" id="inputSec_11615120854713" readability="7">  <p><span>*</span> Enter a valid email</p> <p><span>*</span> Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.</p>  </div> </div> </div>      </div>