An alliance of blue-chip high-tech companies attacked a proposed ...
An alliance of blue-chip high-tech companies attacked a proposed European law that would regulate TV programming on the Internet. The measure is designed to update the European Union’s 1989 TV Without Frontiers directive. The 1989 version of the directive,…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
requiring broadcasters to show a majority of European content, was considered biased against Hollywood. The new law contain no such quotas, but some groups fear the European Parliament may add them. The proposal would require broadcasters of news or children’s programs to have 35 min. between ads -- seen as discouraging production of such programming. The European Parliament’s culture committee reports on the new directive in June and a full parliamentary vote is expected this year. The high-tech companies’ effort Tues. suggests fierce lobbying to come in Brussels. Meanwhile, the U.K. broadcasting, telecom, technology, new media and advertising sectors said EU plans to extend TV regulation to on-demand services will hurt competition and consumers, said the. The new alliance -- led by high-tech trade association Intellect and the Broadband Stakeholder Group -- said it supports updating the TV Without Frontiers (TVWF) directive to boost Europe’s economy and protect consumers. But it said imposing traditional rules on on-demand services could confuse businesses, overwhelm regulators and disappoint consumers. “While we support deregulation within the current scope, and agree that definitions relating to ‘TV-like’ services need to be revisited, we oppose the extension of scope as defined,” the group said in a statement to Brussels. The proposed extension undermines the legal certainty of existing legislation such as the e-commerce directive, creates unenforceable definitions, and fails to allow self-regulatory approaches to develop, it said. The alliance recommended that: (1) The TVWF directive be revised to update regulation affecting scheduled ("linear") TV, but not be broadened to include “non-linear” programming. (2) The definition of linear TV be revamped to include services that are the same as traditional scheduled broadcast services except for the delivery platforms. (3) Self-regulatory mechanisms should be encouraged to work with non-linear services.