European Commission plans to cap international roaming prices for SMS and data downloads are basically sound but need tweaking, EU lawmakers and some mobile industry representatives said Tuesday. Key disagreements include whether the current voice roaming price ceilings should be extended and lowered, and how best to prevent consumers from experiencing “bill shock,” they said at a mini-hearing by the European Parliament Industry, Research and Energy Committee, which is vetting the measure before an expected spring plenary vote.
Fear that feuding among EU bodies might stall reform of e-communications rules appeared to have abated somewhat, after telecom ministers approved compromise language Nov. 27. The language accommodates European Commission and Parliament views. Officials rejected some big-ticket EC proposals -- a new regulatory body, veto power over competition decisions by national regulators, and EU-level harmonization of spectrum freed by digital switchover -- they backed some of its key plans. While not entirely palatable to the EC, parliament or some key industry players, the vote brings final agreement closer, both bodies said.
Efforts to update protections for broadcast signals are continuing to limp along after a meeting Wednesday to Friday in Geneva of the World Intellectual Property Organization Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights. Despite opposition by consumer and civil-liberties groups and others to any new agreement, the panel agreed to leave the issue on the agenda. And in a move likely to spark new controversy, the U.S. hinted it might renew efforts to include webcasters in the treaty.
The European Commission backed away from some telecom reform proposals Friday as it tried to speed agreement with national governments. The EC said a proposed European telecom authority “will be substantially smaller in size and competences than initially envisaged,” focussing not on spectrum or network security but regulation. Independent national regulators will form the heart of the new office, to be called the “Body of the European Telecom Regulators” as proposed by the European Parliament. Heads of national authorities will play a strong role in running the new office and appointing its managing director, the EC said. It acceded to parliament’s wish that half the staff come from national authorities, and said the office shouldn’t employ more than 20 experts. National regulators may have to withdraw or amend a draft competition condition that the EC and BERT dislike, the EC said. National regulators will be able to require functional separation of a communications provider’s network infrastructure from its service branch in some cases, it said. The EC agreed to improve coordination of radio spectrum policy by submitting a multi-annual policy program for adoption by parliament and governments. But it rejected lawmakers’ call for a new body to advise on spectrum policy, saying it wants to avoid collisions with the Radio Spectrum Policy Group. The EC accepted a controversial legislative amendment barring limits on end-users’ fundamental rights and freedoms without prior judicial ruling, calling the language “an important restatement of key legal principles” and leaves governments sufficient room to balance different rights. The EC confirmed its proposal to require telecom operators to notify regulators and the public of data security breaches. It promised the new measure will give more detailed guidance on notification thresholds. Information Society and Media Commissioner Viviane Reding said she hopes the new text will “help the French Presidency to make substantial progress” when ministers meet Nov. 27. It’s rumored, however, that opposition within the Council of Ministers could delay final approval of the reform package (CD Nov 7 p 10).
Final approval of sweeping change to EU telecom rules may be delayed until next year, sources told us Thursday. The package approved in September by the European Parliament seems to have run into problems in the Council of Ministers, German Socialist MEP Erika Mann said. One bump is said to be the proposal for a new regulatory authority, originally floated by the European Commission (EC) and drastically altered by parliament. It’s unclear whether the governments will keep any part of the proposal, she told us. Another bone of contention is said to be failure by the EC and the Council to understand parliament’s decision to set specific conditions to make it easier for major players to invest in new networks if they give rivals access to their networks, Mann said. The Council may be distracted by work on a major energy package, she said. Several universal service issues are also roiling Council talks, Mann said. The French Presidency wants a first-reading agreement on the package by year-end but Council members say it could be pushed to next year, when the Czech Republic takes over, she said. France expects political accord at the Nov. 27 council meeting -- a “major break-through” if it occurs, a person close to the matter said. If it does, the text first must be made final, followed by formal Council adoption of a common position on Jan. 19, 2009, the source said. That would put Parliament’s final vote in April, with the laws taking effect next summer. EU countries would have until summer 2011 to adopt the regulations into national law, with the new regulatory body starting work in January 2010, the source said. The package will be approved before next June’s parliamentary elections, the source said.
German authorities face tighter controls on access to telecom traffic data under a preliminary ruling by that nation’s Federal Constitutional Court. The court said law enforcement may not access such data, except in cases of “urgent danger” to life, risk of injury or individual freedom or serious threat to national security, according to attorney Axel Spies. The case at issue involved a challenge to a law mandating storage of telecommunications traffic data. The law requires telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain all traffic data for six months, Spies said. In March, the court said police agencies only can access the information for very serious crimes, not for misdemeanours or copyright violations, he said. The order made no mention of reimbursing communications service providers’ costs, he said. The court said it needs more information to decide if that financial burden justifies freezing the law, leaving the compensation issue hanging, he said. All telecom carriers must now store their traffic data, and ISPs are subject to the law beginning Jan. 1, he said. A challenge to the EU data retention directive is pending at the European Court of Justice, he said.
EU plans to overhaul rules on government financing of public service broadcasters could violate national sovereignty, the European Broadcasting Union said Wednesday. The European Commission approach ignores the wishes of a large number of member countries by significantly altering the 2001 Broadcasting Communication, the EBU said. Commercial broadcasters, however, said the draft merely modernizes existing rules.
SES is showing strong growth and will weather the financial storm, the satellite operator said Monday. Revenue the first nine months of the year was over 7 percent higher than a year earlier, and EBITDA was up 5.6 percent, Chief Financial Officer Mark Rigolle told analysts. “The underlying growth engine of this company is very much intact,” he said. A slowdown in media consumption or lag in mobile TV could affect SES, but it’s unclear how, CEO Remain Bausch said.
Ireland’s challenge to a law requiring storage of telephone and Internet traffic data should be thrown out, European Court of Justice Advocate General Yves Bot said Tuesday. The Irish government contested the 2006 data retention directive, saying it was incorrectly based on treaty provisions dealing with the internal market instead of on those covering police and judicial cooperation in criminal cases, the ECJ said. Bot’s non-binding opinion said retention of traffic data places a significant financial burden on e-communications services providers proportionate to the amount of data they must store and the period for which it must be held. If national rules aren’t harmonized, providers will face different costs across Europe, which could create a barrier to the free movement of electronic communications services and hamper the internal market in those services, Bot said. The mere fact that the directive’s main purpose is to investigate and prosecute serious crime isn’t enough for it to fall within the area covered by police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, he said. The duty to hold traffic data does not involve any direct law enforcement participation, nor does it standardize national rules regarding either access to the information or its exchange between police agencies, placing it outside the scope of measures dealing with law enforcement cooperation, Bot said. Therefore, it could not have been enacted under the provisions claimed by Ireland, he said. The nation’s action was limited to formal issues and didn’t address the fact that “registering the telecommunications behaviour and movements of the entire EU population in the absence of any reasonable suspicion is clearly disproportionate and violates human rights,” said the German Working Group on Data Retention, an association of civil rights and privacy activists and Internet users. If the ECJ follows Bot’s opinion, it will have to consider the directive’s compatibility with human rights in a second case likely to be filed by the German Federal Constitutional Court, the working group said. A suit by more than 34,000 citizens challenging Germany’s data retention law is pending in that court, which is expected to rule shortly on a request for a preliminary injunction, it said. The application is directed primarily against storing of Internet access, anonymizing services and e-mail data, which takes effect Jan. 1, it said. The constitutional court will likely issue a judgment after the ECJ decides on the human rights issues, the working group said. The advocate general’s opinion is a “setback for the plaintiffs,” said German telecommunications lawyer Axel Spies. Although the judges will make the final decision, an advocate general’s opinion “can have a significant bearing on final rulings,” he said.
The issue of whether revised EU e-communications rules should recognize the ITU’s role in allocating spectrum and coordinating spectrum use continues to roil talks between the European Commission and the satellite industry, said European Satellite Operators Association Secretary General Aarti Holla-Maini in an interview. But strong lobbying by ESOA persuaded the European Parliament in September to adopt many amendments referring to the ITU, and governments could follow suit, she said. The new rules need lawmakers’ and EU states’ approval.