Please see our reply to question 1.
One of the biggest challenges encountered is trying to apply and "operationalize" the terminology and theoretical concept of vulnerability, which is also reflected by the replies to Question 5 (Fig. 3).
When replying to question 14 of the public consultation which related to the impact of a publisher's right on consumers, around 94% of individual consumers and 81% of the organisations who responded indicated a potential negative impact.
Concerns about randomisation are a notable feature of Figure 1, a parallel coordinate plot of individuals' responses to the seven questions, divided for visual convenience into the four groups previously mentioned (based on replies to questions 3 and 7).
With reference to the reply to Question P-000817/2019 (22 March 2019), can the Commission answer the following additional questions? 1.
The evaluation process is underway, as recently pointed out in the reply to Question E-004651/2018, and information about it is publicly available(2).
In reply to Question E-003519/20186 5): E-003519/20186 5 non-complIfnce winstancesatiof (EC) No 1008/2008 are to be detected, the Commission recalls that it may take the necessary action including withe appRegulationnfringECeNo procedures'.
In its reply to Question E-009979/2012, the Commission explains that the problem exists (disingenuously answering a question that I did not ask) and points, again, to unspecified research on which its online child protection policy is apparently based.
In its reply to Question E-001693/2017, the Commission refers to a study that has been commissioned concerning the regulation of access to cities for vehicles and the enforcement of the access regimes in Europe.
One participant did not reply to questions concerning QoL at T1, and 4 persons were lost to follow up at T2.
Intra-group activity has been characterized in terms of propensity of people to reply to questions of other members [30], coherence of discussion topics [31], or item sharing practices [2].
