Activities of Kaja KALLAS related to 2016/0288(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC) (recast) PDF (3 MB) DOC (572 KB)
Amendments (154)
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The requirements concerning the capabilities of electronic communications networks are constantly increasing. While in the past the focus was mainly on growing bandwidth available overall and to each individual user, other parameters like latency, availability and reliability are becoming increasingly important. The current response towards this demand is bringing optical fibre closer and closer to the user and future 'very high capacity networks' will require performance parameters which aremeet the needs of the most demanding, digitally intensive end- users, equivalent to what a network basedconsisting onf optical fibre elements at least up to the distribution point at the serving location can deliver. This corresponds in the fixed-line connection case to network performance equivalent to what is achievable by an optical fibre installation up to a multi-dwelling buildingthat reaches to individual households or apartments, considered as the serving location, and in the mobile connection case to network performance similar to what is achievable based on an optical fibre installation up to the base station, considered as the serving location. Variations in end-users' experience which are due to the different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point should not be taken into account for the purposes of establishing whether or not a wireless network could be considered as providing similar network performance. In accordance with the principle of technological neutrality, other technologies and transmission media should not be excluded, where they compare with this baseline scenario in terms of their capabilities. The roll-out of such 'very high capacity networks' will further increase the capabilities of networks and pave the way for the roll-out of future mobile network generations based on enhanced air interfaces and a more densified network architecture.
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The services used for communications purposes, and the technical means of their delivery, have evolved considerably. End-users increasingly substitute traditional voice telephony, text messages (SMS) and electronic mail conveyance services by functionally equivalent online services such as Voice over IP, messaging services and web-based e-mail services, although they still do not consider them as substitutes to traditional voice services, due to a perception of different levels of quality, security and interoperability . In order to ensure that end-users are effectively and equally protected when using functionally equivalent services, a future-oriented definition of electronic communications services should not be purely based on technical parameters but rather build on a functional approach. to the extent possible. The existing differences between services should however be acknowledged, online services such as Voice over IP being provided in most cases without having substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication but on the other hand allowing end-user to switch from service to service in an easier manner than from traditional communication services ;The scope of necessary regulation should be appropriate to achieve its public interest objectives. While "conveyance of signals" remains an important parameter for determining the services falling into the scope of this Directive, the definition should cover also other services that enable communication in a proportionate manner to deliver the best outcomes for end users. From an end-user's perspective it is not relevant whether a provider conveys signals itself or whether the communication is delivered via an internet access service, therefore these services should not be defined on the basis of the technology used, but on the legitimate expectations end-users have for the service provided depending for instance on the price paid or the ease of terminating the contract . The amended definition of electronic communications services should therefore contain three types of services which may partly overlap, that is to say internet access services according to the definition in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120, interpersonal communications services as defined in this Directive, and services consisting wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals. This last category should not include services where connectivity is provided as an input product into connected devices or 'smart goods' or where the provision of connectivity with such products is subject to a contract with the end-user, as they would be considered as embedded digital content or services according to the Directive concerning contracts for the supply of digital content . The definition of electronic communications service should eliminate ambiguities observed in the implementation of the previous definition and allow a calibrated provision-by- provision application of the specific rights and obligations contained in the framework to the different types of services. The processing of personal data by electronic communications services, whether as remuneration or otherwise, must be in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC which will be replaced by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) on 25 May 201823 . _________________ 23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation); OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to fall within the scope of the definition of electronic communications service, a service needs to be provided normally in exchange for remuneration. In the digital economy, market participants increasingly consider information about users as having a monetary value. Electronic communications services are oftenin some cases supplied against counter-performance other than money, for instance by giving access to personal data or other datapersonal data where such data is used beyond what is essential for the performance of the contract. The concept of remuneration should therefore encompass situations where the provider of a service requests and the end-user actively provides personal data, such as name or email address, or other data directly or indirectly to the provider. It should also encompass situations where the provider collects information without the end-user actively supplying it, such as personal data, including the IP address, directly or indirectly, that is used for a purpose which is not necessary for other automatically generated information, such as information collected and transmitted by a cookie) performance of the contract . In line with the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Article 57 TFEU24 , remuneration exists within the meaning of the Treaty also if the service provider is paid by a third party and not by the service recipient. The concept of remuneration should therefore also encompass situations where the end-user is exposed to advertisements as a condition for gaining access to the service, or situations where the service provider monetises personal data it has collected. _________________ 24 Case C-352/85 Bond van Adverteerders and Others vs The Netherlands State, EU:C:1988:196.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The services used for communications purposes, and the technical means of their delivery, have evolved considerably. End-users increasingly substitute traditional voice telephony, text messages (SMS) and electronic mail conveyance services by functionally equivalent online services such as Voice over IP, messaging services and web-based e-mail services, although they still do not consider them as substitutes to traditional voice services, due to a perception of different levels of quality, security and interoperability . In order to ensure that end-users are effectively and equally protected when using functionally equivalent services, a future-oriented definition of electronic communications services should not be purely based on technical parameters but rather build on a functional approach to the extent possible. The existing differences between services should however be acknowledged, online services such as Voice over IP being provided in most cases without having substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication but on the other hand allowing end-user to switch from service to service in an easier manner than from traditional communication services. The scope of necessary regulation should be appropriate to achieve its public interest objectives. While "conveyance of signals" remains an important parameter for determining the services falling into the scope of this Directive, the definition should cover also other services that enable communication in a proportionate manner to deliver the best outcomes for end users. From an end-user's perspective it is not relevant whether a provider conveys signals itself or whether the communication is delivered via an internet access service, therefore these services should not be defined on the basis of the technology used, but on the legitimate expectations end-users have for the service provided depending for instance on the price paid or the ease of terminating the contract. The amended definition of electronic communications services should therefore contain three types of services which may partly overlap, that is to say internet access services according to the definition in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120, interpersonal communications services as defined in this Directive, and services consisting wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals. This last category should not include services where connectivity is provided as an input product into connected devices or 'smart goods' or where the provision of connectivity with such products is subject to a contract with the end-user, as they would be considered as embedded digital content or services according to the Directive concerning contracts for the supply of digital content. The definition of electronic communications service should eliminate ambiguities observed in the implementation of the previous definition and allow a calibrated provision-by- provision application of the specific rights and obligations contained in the framework to the different types of services. The processing of personal data by electronic communications services, whether as remuneration or otherwise, must be in compliance with Directive 95/46/EC which will be replaced by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) on 25 May 201823 . __________________ 23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation); OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Interpersonal communications services are services thatwhere the principal purpose of the service consists in enableing interpersonal and interactive exchange of information, covering services like traditional voice calls between two individuals but also all types of emails, messaging services, or group chats. Interpersonal communications services only cover communications between a finite, that is to say not potentially unlimited, number of natural persons which is determined by the sender of the communication. Communications involving legal persons should be within the scope of the definition where natural persons act on behalf of those legal persons or are involved at least on one side of the communication. Interactive communication entails that the service allows the recipient of the information to respond. Services which do not meet those requirements, such as linear broadcasting, video on demand, websites, social networks, blogs, or exchange of information between machines, should not be considered as interpersonal communications services. Under exceptional circumstances, aA service should not be considered as an interpersonal communications service if the interpersonal and interactive communication facility is a purely ancillary feature to anonot the main purpose of ther service and for objective technical reasons cannot be used without that principal service, and its integration is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules governing electronic communications services, as the application of the provisions in this Directive would not be proportionate to the level of connectivity provided with this service . An example for such an exception could be, in principle, a communication channel in online games, depending on the features of the communication facility of the service.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to fall within the scope of the definition of electronic communications service, a service needs to be provided normally in exchange for remuneration. In the digital economy, market participants increasingly consider information about users as having a monetary value. Electronic communications services are oftenin some cases supplied against counter-performance other than money, for instance by giving access to personal data or other datapersonal data where such data is used beyond what is essential for the performance of the contract. The concept of remuneration should therefore encompass situations where the provider of a service requests and the end-user actively provides personal data, such as name or email address, or other data directly or indirectly to the provider. It should also encompass situations where the provider collects information without the end-user actively supplying it, such as personal data, including the IP address, directly or indirectly, that is used for a purpose which is not necessary for other automatically generated information, such as information collected and transmitted by a cookie) performance of the contract. In line with the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Article 57 TFEU24 , remuneration exists within the meaning of the Treaty also if the service provider is paid by a third party and not by the service recipient. The concept of remuneration should therefore also encompass situations where the end-user is exposed to advertisements as a condition for gaining access to the service, or situations where the service provider monetises personal data it has collected. __________________ 24 Case C-352/85 Bond van Adverteerders and Others vs The Netherlands State, EU:C:1988:196.
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Interpersonal communications services using numbers from a national and international telephone numbering plan connect with the public (packet or circuit) switched telephone network. Those number-based interpersonal communications services comprise both services to which end-users numbers are assigned for the purpose of ensuring end- to-end connectivity and services enabling end-users to reach persons to whom such numbers have been assigned. The mere use of a number as an identifier should not be considered equivalent to the use of a number to connect with the public switched telephone network, and should therefore, in itself, not be considered sufficient to qualify a service as a number- based interpersonal communications service. In addition where the service provided does not rely on its own infrastructure and therefore does not have substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication, the use of the number should also be considered in a different manner as the obligations would not be proportionate to their ability to deliver a certain quality of service ;Number-independent interpersonal communications services should be subject only to obligations, where public interests require applying specific regulatory obligations to all types of interpersonal communications services, regardless of whether they use numbers for the provision of their service. It is justified to treat number-based interpersonal communications services differently, as they participate in and hence also benefit from a publicly assured interoperable ecosystem.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Interpersonal communications services are services thatwhere the principal purpose of the service consists in enableing interpersonal and interactive exchange of information, covering services like traditional voice calls between two individuals but also all types of emails, messaging services, or group chats. Interpersonal communications services only cover communications between a finite, that is to say not potentially unlimited, number of natural persons which is determined by the sender of the communication. Communications involving legal persons should be within the scope of the definition where natural persons act on behalf of those legal persons or are involved at least on one side of the communication. Interactive communication entails that the service allows the recipient of the information to respond. Services which do not meet those requirements, such as linear broadcasting, video on demand, websites, social networks, blogs, or exchange of information between machines, should not be considered as interpersonal communications services. Under exceptional circumstances, aA service should not be considered as an interpersonal communications service if the interpersonal and interactive communication facility is a purely ancillary feature to anonot the main purpose of ther service and for objective technical reasons cannot be used without that principal service, and its integration is not a means to circumvent the applicability of the rules governing electronic communications services, as the application of the provisions in this Directive would not be proportionate to the level of connectivity provided with this service. An example for such an exception could be, in principle, a communication channel in online games, depending on the features of the communication facility of the service.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Interpersonal communications services using numbers from a national and international telephone numbering plan connect with the public (packet or circuit) switched telephone network. Those number-based interpersonal communications services comprise both services to which end-users numbers are assigned for the purpose of ensuring end- to-end connectivity and services enabling end-users to reach persons to whom such numbers have been assigned. The mere use of a number as an identifier should not be considered equivalent to the use of a number to connect with the public switched telephone network, and should therefore, in itself, not be considered sufficient to qualify a service as a number- based interpersonal communications service. In addition where the service provided does not rely on its own infrastructure and therefore does not have substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication, the use of the number should also be considered in a different manner as the obligations would not be proportionate to their ability to deliver a certain quality of service. Number-independent interpersonal communications services should be subject only to obligations, where public interests require applying specific regulatory obligations to all types of interpersonal communications services, regardless of whether they use numbers for the provision of their service. It is justified to treat number-based interpersonal communications services differently, as they participate in and hence also benefit from a publicly assured interoperable ecosystem.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is necessary to give appropriate incentives for investment in new very high capacity networks that will support innovation in content-rich Internet services and strengthen the international competitiveness of the European Union. Such networks have enormous potential to deliver benefits to consumers and businesses across the European Union. It is therefore vital to promote sustainable investment in the development of these new networks, while safeguarding competitionlong- term competition, as remaining bottlenecks and physical barriers to entry remain at the infrastructure level, and boosting consumer choice through regulatory predictability and consistency.
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) The aim is progressively to reduce ex ante sector-specific rules as competition in the markets develops and, ultimately, for electronic communications to be governed by competition law only. Considering that the markets for electronic communications have shown strong competitive dynamics in recent years, it is essential that ex ante regulatory obligations only be imposed where there is no effective and sustainable long-term competition on the retail markets concernedlevant markets concerned. However, the markets for electronic communications in Europe being still largely composed of vertically integrated operators which can leverage their dominance in the wholesale market to thereafter increase their dominance in the retail markets, long term competition at the retail level should be ensured by the removal of existing barriers to entry at the infrastructure level.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) In accordance with the principle of the separation of regulatory and operational functions, Member States should guarantee the independence of the national regulatory authority and other competent authorities, including from respective governments, with a view to ensuring the impartiality of their decisions. This requirement of independence is without prejudice to the institutional autonomy and constitutional obligations of the Member States or to the principle of neutrality with regard to the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership laid down in Article 295 of the Treaty. National regulatory and other competent authorities should be in possession of all the necessary resources, in terms of staffing, expertise, and financial means, for the performance of their tasks.
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The benefits of the single market to service providers and end-users can be best achieved by general authorisation of electronic communications networks and of electronic communications services other than number-independent interpersonal communications services, without requiring any explicit decision or administrative act by the national regulatory authority and by limiting any procedural requirements to a declaratory notification only. Where Member States require notification by providers of electronic communications networks or services when they start their activities, thisone single notification should be submitted to BEREC which acts as a single contact point. Such notification should not entail administrative cost for the providers and cshould be made available via an entry point aton the website of the national regulatory authoritiesBEREC. BEREC should forward in good time the notifications to the national regulatory authority in all Member States in which the providers of electronic communications networks or services intend to provide electronic communications networks or services. Member States can also require proof that notification was made by means of any legally recognised postal or electronic acknowledgement of receipt of the notification to BEREC. Such acknowledgement should in any case not consist of or require an administrative act by the national regulatory authority, or any other authority.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The benefits of the single market to service providers and end-users can be best achieved by general authorisation of electronic communications networks and of electronic communications services other than number-independent interpersonal communications services, without requiring any explicit decision or administrative act by the national regulatory authority and by limiting any procedural requirements to a declaratory notification only. Where Member States require notification by providers of electronic communications networks or services when they start their activities, thisone single notification should be submitted to BEREC which acts as a single contact point. Such notification should not entail administrative cost for the providers and cshould be made available via an entry point aton the website of the national regulatory authoritiesBEREC. BEREC should forward in good time the notifications to the national regulatory authority in all Member States in which the providers of electronic communications networks or services intend to provide electronic communications networks or services. Member States can also require proof that notification was made by means of any legally recognised postal or electronic acknowledgement of receipt of the notification to BEREC. Such acknowledgement should in any case not consist of or require an administrative act by the national regulatory authority, or any other authority.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Contrary to the other categories of electronic communications networks and services as defined in this Directive, number-independent interpersonal communications services do not benefit from the use of public numbering resources and do not participate in a publicly assured interoperable ecosystem. It is therefore not appropriate to subject these types of services to the general authorisation regime. It is also therefore not appropriate for Member States to subject such services to prior authorisation or any other equivalent requirement.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Contrary to the other categories of electronic communications networks and services as defined in this Directive, number-independent interpersonal communications services do not benefit from the use of public numbering resources and do not participate in a publicly assured interoperable ecosystem. It is therefore not appropriate to subject these types of services to the general authorisation regime Therefore, Member States should not subject such services to prior authorisation or any other equivalent requirement.
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47 a (new)
Recital 47 a (new)
(47 a) Providers of electronic communication services that operate in more than one member state are still subject to different rules, requirements and reporting obligations despite having the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services anywhere in Europe, which hinders the development and growth of the internal market for electronic communications. This should therefore be possible for such providers to be granted on single general authorisation by the member state indicated in their notification as the provider's main establishment in the EU. The single general authorisation should include the specific conditions that apply in the different member states of operation to ensure compliance of the service provider with all relevant laws. BEREC should facilitate the coordination and exchange of information to ensure compliance of the service provider with Union and national law. Providers of electronic communication services would still need to obtain specific authorisations for the rights of use for numbers, radio spectrum and for rights to install facilities.
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) To alleviate reporting and information obligations for network and service providers and the competent authority concerned,such obligations should be proportionate, objectively justified and limited to what is strictly necessary. In particular, duplication of requests for information by the competent authority, and by BEREC and the systematic and regular proof of compliance with all conditions under a general authorisation or a right of use should be avoided. Reporting and information obligations for electronic communication services providers operating in several Member states shall be coordinated through the Member state responsible of granting the single general authorisation, without prejudice to information request related to the granting of rights of use for numbers, radio spectrum and for rights to install facilities. BEREC should facilitate the free flow of information between the concerned Member states. Such information should be requested in a common and standardised format. Undertakings should know the intended use of the information sought. Provision of information should not be a condition for market access. For statistical purposes a notification may be required from providers of electronic communications networks or services when they cease activities.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47 a (new)
Recital 47 a (new)
(47a) Providers of electronic communication services that operate in more than one Member State are still subject to different rules, requirements and reporting obligations despite having the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services anywhere in Europe, which hinders the development and growth of the internal market for electronic communications. This should therefore be possible for such providers to be granted on single general authorisation by the Member State indicated in their notification as the provider's main establishment in the EU. The single general authorisation should include the specific conditions that apply in the different Member States of operation to ensure compliance of the service provider with all relevant laws. BEREC should facilitate the coordination and exchange of information to ensure compliance of the service provider with Union and national law. Providers of electronic communication services would still need to obtain specific authorisations for the rights of use for numbers, radio spectrum and for rights to install facilities.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) To alleviate reporting and information obligations for network and service providers and the competent authority concerned, such obligations should be proportionate, objectively justified and limited to what is strictly necessary. In particular, duplication of requests for information by the competent authority, and by BEREC and the systematic and regular proof of compliance with all conditions under a general authorisation or a right of use should be avoided. Reporting and information obligations for electronic communication services providers operating in several Member States shall be coordinated through the Member State responsible of granting the single general authorisation, without prejudice to information request related to the granting of rights of use for numbers, radio spectrum and for rights to install facilities. BEREC should facilitate the free flow of information between the concerned Member States. Such information should be requested in a common and standardised format. Undertakings should know the intended use of the information sought. Provision of information should not be a condition for market access. For statistical purposes a notification may be required from providers of electronic communications networks or services when they cease activities.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Electronic communications broadband networks are becoming increasingly diverse in terms of technology, topology, medium used and ownership, therefore, regulatory intervention must rely on detailed information and forecasts regarding network roll-out in order to be effective and to target the areas where it is needed. That information should include plans regarding both deployment of very high capacity networks, as well as significant upgrades or extensions of existing copper or other networks which might not match the performance characteristics of very high capacity networks in all respects, such as roll-out of fibre to the cabinet coupled with active technologies like vectoring. The level of detail and territorial granularity of the information that national regulatory authorities should gather should be guided by the specific regulatory objective, and should be adequate for the regulatory purposes that it serves. Therefore, the size of the territorial unit will also vary between Member States, depending on the regulatory needs in the specific national circumstances, and on the availability of local data. Level 3 in the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) is unlikely to be a sufficiently small territorial unit in most circumstances. National regulatory authorities should be guided by BEREC guidelines on best practice to approach such a task, and such guidelines will be able to rely on the existing experience of national regulatory authorities in conducting geographical surveys of networks roll-out. National regulatory authoritiesWithout prejudice to confidentiality requirements and protection of business secrets, National regulatory authorities should make available in an open data format and without restrictions to reuse such surveys and should make available tools to end- users as regards quality of service to contribute towards the improvement of their awareness of the available connectivity services.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 91 a (new)
Recital 91 a (new)
(91a) In order to safeguard the security and integrity of networks and services, the use of end-to-end encryption should be promoted and, where necessary, be mandatory in accordance with the principles of security and privacy by design; in particular, Member States should not impose any obligation to encryption providers, providers of electronic communications services and all other organisations (at all levels of the supply chain) that would result in the weakening of the security of their networks and services, such as the allowing or facilitation of "backdoors".
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) One important task assigned to BEREC is to adopt opindecisions in relation to cross-border disputes where appropriate. National regulatory authorities should therefore fully reflect any opinimplement the decision taken by BEREC in their measures imposing any obligation on an undertaking or otherwise resolving the dispute in such cases.
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 86
Recital 86
(86) Member States should be encouraobliged to consider joint authorisations as an option when issuing rights of use where the expected usage covers cross- border situations and there is a significant risk of crossborder harmful interference. They should in addition be encouraged to consider such joint authorisations in particular on request of market participants which provide evidence of a crossborder demand for the provision of paneuropean services.
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 91 a (new)
Recital 91 a (new)
(91 a) In order to ensure a safeguard to the security and integrity of networks and services, the use of end-to-end encryption should be promoted and, where necessary, be mandatory in accordance with the principles of data protection by design and privacy by design; in particular, Member States should not impose any obligation to encryption providers, providers of electronic communications services and all other organisations (at all levels of the supply chain) that would result in the weakening of the security of their networks and services, such as the allowing or facilitation of "backdoors";
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 106
Recital 106
(106) The demand for harmonised radio spectrum is not uniform in all parts of the Union. In cases where there is lack of demand for a harmonised band at regional or national level, Member States could exceptionally be able to allow an alternative use of the band as long as such lack of demand persists, is based on a forward-looking assessment of market development and provided that the alternative use does not prejudice the harmonised use of the said band by other Member States and that it ceases when demand for the harmonised use materialises.
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 119
Recital 119
(119) Member States should only impose, prior to the granting of right, the verification of elements that can reasonably be demonstrated by an applicant exercising ordinary care, taking due account of the important public and market value of radio spectrum as a scarce public resource. This is without prejudice to the possibility for subsequent verification of the fulfilment of eligibility criteria, for example through milestones, where criteria could not reasonably be met initially. To preserve effective and efficient use of radio spectrum, Member States should not grant rights where their review indicates applicants' inability to comply with the conditions, without prejudice to the possibility of facilitating time-limited experimental use. Sufficiently long maximum duration of authorisations for the use of spectrum should increase investment predictability to contribute to faster network roll-out and better services, as well as stability to support spectrum trading and leasing, subject to regular reviews to assess whether market development and technological innovation allow for a more efficient use of spectrum. Unless use of spectrum is authorised for an unlimited period of time, such duration should both take account of the objectives pursued and be sufficient to facilitate recoupment of the investments made. While a longer duration can ensure investment predictability, measures to ensure effective and efficient use of radio spectrum, such as the power of the competent authority to amend or withdraw the right in case of non- compliance with the conditions attached to the rights of use, or the facilitation of radio spectrum tradability and leasing, will serve to prevent inappropriate accumulation of radio spectrum and support greater flexibility in distributing spectrum resources. Greater recourse to annualised fees is also a means to ensure a continuous assessment of the use of the spectrum by the holder of the right.
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 127
Recital 127
(127) Massive growth in radio spectrum demand, and in end-user demand for wireless broadband capacity, calls for solutions allowing alternative, complementary, spectrally efficient access solutions, including low-power wireless access systems with a small-area operating range such as radio local area networks (RLAN) and networks of low-power small- size cellular access points. Such complementary wireless access systems, in particular publicly accessible RLAN access points, increase access to the internet for end-users and mobile traffic off-loading for mobile operators. RLANs use harmonised radio spectrum without requiring an individual authorisation or spectrum usage right. Most RLAN access points are so far used by private users as local wireless extension of their fixed broadband connection. End-users, within the limits of their own internet subscription, should not be prevented from sharing access to their RLAN with others, so as to increase the number of available access points, particularly in densely populated areas, maximise wireless data capacity through radio spectrum re-use and create a cost- effective complementary wireless broadband infrastructure accessible to other end-users. Therefore, unnecessary restrictions to the deployment and interlinkage of RLAN access points should also be removed. Public authorities or public service providers, who use RLANs in their premises for their personnel, visitors or clients, for example to facilitate access to e-Government services or for information on public transport or road traffic management, could also provide access to such access points for general use by citizens as an ancillary service to services they offer to the public on such premises, to the extent allowed by competition and public procurement rules. Moreover, the provider of such local access to electronic communications networks within or around a private property or a limited public area on a non-commercial basis or as an ancillary service to another activity that is not dependant on such access (such as RLAN hotspots made available to customers of other commercial activities or to the general public in that area) can be subject to compliance with general authorisations for rights of use for radio spectrum but should not be subject to any conditions or requirements attached to general authorisations applicable to providers of public communications networks or services or to obligations regarding end-users or interconnection. However, such provider should not remain subject to the liability rules of Article 12 of Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce35 as the liability of individuals providing local access to third party for a non commercial purpose over content transmitted through their network that they do not control would discourage them to do so. Further technologies such as LiFi are emerging that will complement current radio spectrum capabilities of RLANs and wireless access point to include optical visible light-based access points and lead to hybrid local area networks allowing optical wireless communication. _________________ 35 Directive2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce), (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p.1).
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 138
Recital 138
(138) In case such interoperability issues arise, the Commission may request a BEREC report which should provide a factual assessment of the market situation at the Union and Member States level. On the basis of the BEREC report and other available evidence and taking into account the effects on the internal market, the Commission should decide whether there is a need for regulatory intervention by national regulatory authorities. If the Commission considers that such regulatory intervention should be considered by National Regulatory Authorities, it may adopt implementing measures specifying the nature and scope of possible regulatory interventions by NRAs, including in particular measures to impose the mandatory use of standards or specifications on all or specific providers. The terms 'European standards' and 'international standards' are defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012.36 National regulatory authorities should assess, in the light of the specific national circumstances, whether any intervention is necessary and justified to ensure end-to-end-connectivity or access to emergency services, and if so, impose proportionate obligations in accordance with the Commission implementing measures. National regulatory authorities should not add additional requirements to the Commission implementing measures as it would create barriers to the internal market. _________________ 36 Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on European standardisation, amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC, 94/25/EC, 95/16/EC, 97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/23/EC and 2009/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Decision 87/95/EEC and Decision No 1673/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [OJ L 364 of 14.11.2012, p.12]
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 139
Recital 139
(139) In situations where undertakings are deprived of access to viable alternatives to non-replicable assets up to the first distribution point, national regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose access obligations to all operators, without prejudice to their respective market power. In this regard, national regulatory authorities should take into consideration all technical and economic barriers to future replication of networks. However as such obligations can be intrusive, undermine incentives for investments, and have the counterproductive effect of strengthening the position of dominant players, they should only be taken where this is justified and proportionate to achieve long term sustainable competition in the relevant markets. The mere fact that more than one such infrastructure already exists should not necessarily be interpreted as showing that its assets are replicable. The first distribution point should be identified by reference to objective criteria.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 147
Recital 147
(147) Two or more undertakings can be found to enjoy a joint dominant position not only where there exist structural or other links between them but also where the structure of the relevant market is conducive to coordinated effects, that is, it encourages parallel or aligned anti- competitive behaviour on the market. In light of the increased convergence and consolidation in electronic communications markets, including in some cases content-related markets, with increasing markets being composed of oligopolies or duopolies, that could lead to the ineffectiveness of the current SMP framework, there is a need to consider whether two or more undertakings can also be found to have a position equivalent to having significant market power where they might significantly impede effective competition. The assessment should take into account the relevant markets including but not limited to the market shares of other market participants, the market power of an undertaking on closely related markets, barriers to entry, market concentration, product differentiation, capacity constraints and switching costs.
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 155
Recital 155
(155) For national regulatory authorities the starting point foro facilitate the identification of wholesale markets susceptible to ex ante regulation is the analysis of correspondingt might be appropriate to analyse the relevant retail markets. It is however not necessary to formally define the retail markets when the focus of the market analysis procedure is on a wholesale market as an wholesale market might correspond to more than one retail markets. The analysis of effective competition at the retail and at the wholesale level is conducted from a forward-looking perspective over a given time horizon, and is guided by competition law, including the relevant case-law of the Court of Justice, as appropriate. If it is concluded that a retail markets would be effectively competitive in the absence of ex ante wholesale regulation on the corresponding relevant market(s), this shouldmay lead the national regulatory authority to conclude that regulation is no longer needed at the relevant wholesale level.
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 157
Recital 157
(157) When assessing wholesale regulation to solve problems at the retail level, national regulatory authorities should take into account that several wholesale markets can provide wholesale upstream inputs for a particular retail market, and conversely, one wholesale market can provide wholesale upstream inputs for a variety of retail markets. Furthermore, competitive dynamics in a particular market can be influenced by markets that are contiguous but not in a vertical relationship, such as can be the case between certain fixed and mobile markets. National regulatory authorities should conduct that assessment for each individual wholesale market considered for regulation, starting withassessing whether remedies for access to civil infrastructure, as such remedies arebeing usually conducive to more sustainable competition including infrastructure competition, but at the same time subject to availability or physical constraints, or remedies for access to associated facilities, are the most appropriate and thereafter analysing any wholesale markets considered susceptible to ex ante regulation in order of their likely suitability to address identified competition problems at retail level. When deciding on the specific remedy to be imposed, national regulatory authorities should assess its technical feasibility and carry out a cost- benefit analysis, having regard to its degree of suitability to address the identified competition problems at retail level, and enabling sustainable competition based on differentiation and technological neutrality . National regulatory authorities should consider the consequences of imposing any specific remedy which, if feasible only on certain network topologies, could constitute a disincentive for the deployment of very high capacity networks in the interest of end-users. In addition, national regulatory authorities should provide incentives through the remedies imposed, and where it is possible before the roll-out of infrastructure, for the development of flexible and open network architecture, which would reduce eventually the burden and complexity of remedies imposed at a later stage. At each stage of the assessment, before the national regulatory authority determines whether any additional remedy should be imposed on the significant market power operator, it should seek to determine whether the retaillevant markets concerned would be effectively competitive in the light of any relevant commercial arrangements or other wholesale market circumstances, including other types of regulation already in force, such as for example general access obligations to non-replicable assets or obligations imposed pursuant to Directive 2014/61/EU, and of any regulation already deemed appropriate by the national regulatory authority for an operator with significant market power. Even if such differences do not result in the definition of distinct geographic markets, they may justify differentiation in the appropriate remedies imposed in the light of the diferring intensity of competitive constraints.
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 172
Recital 172
(172) Civil engineering assets that can host an electronic communications network are crucial for the successful roll-out of new very high capacity networks because of the high cost of duplicating them, and the significant savings that can be made when they can be reused. Therefore, in addition to the rules on physical infrastructure laid down in Directive 2014/61/EU, a specific remedy is necessary in those circumstances where civil engineering assets are owned by an operator designated with significant market power. Where civil engineering assets exist and are reusable, the positive effect of achieving effective access to them on the roll-out of competing infrastructure is very high, and it is therefore necessary to ensure that access to such assets can be used as a self-standing remedy for the improvement of competitive and deployment dynamics in any downstream market, to be considered before assessing the need to impose any other potential remedies, and not just as an ancillary remedy to other wholesale products or services or as a remedy limited to undertakings availing of such other wholesale products or services. However, access to such assets can be limited by physical constraints or limited availability, therefore equivalent means of access such as access to dark fiber should also be considered. National regulatory authorities should value reusable legacy civil engineering assets on the basis of the regulatory accounting value net of the accumulated depreciation at the time of calculation, indexed by an appropriate price index, such as the retail price index, and excluding those assets which are fully depreciated, over a period of not less than 40 years, but still in use.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 175
Recital 175
(175) In geographic areas where two access networks can be expected on a forward-looking basis, end-users are more likely to benefit from improvements in network quality, by virtue of infrastructure- based competition, than in areas where only one network persists. The adequacy of competition on other parameters, such as price and choice, is likely to depend on the national and local competitive circumstances. Where at least one of the network operators offers wholesale access to any interested undertaking on reasonable commercial terms permitting long term sustainable competition on the retaillevant markets, national regulatory authorities are unlikely to need to impose or maintain SMP-based wholesale access obligations, beyond access to civil infrastructure, therefore reliance can be placed on the application of general competition rules. This applies a fortiori if both network operators offer reasonable commercial wholesale access. In both such cases, it may be more appropriate for national regulatory authorities to rely on specific monitoring on an ex post basis. Where on a forward- looking basis, three access network operators are present or are expected to be present and to sustainably compete in the same retail and wholesale markets (e.g. as can be the case for mobile, and as can occur in some geographic areas for fixed- line networks, especially where there is effective access to civil infrastructure and/or co-investment, such that three or more operators have effective control over the necessary access network assets to meet retail demand), national regulatory authorities will be less likely to identify an operator as having SMP, unless they make a finding of collective dominance, or significant impediment to effective competition, or if each of the undertakings in question has significant market power in distinct wholesale markets, such as in the case of voice call termination markets. The application of general competition rules in such markets characterised by sustainable and effective infrastructure-based competition should be sufficient.
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 177
Recital 177
(177) Price control may be necessary when market analysis in a particular market reveals inefficient competition. In particular, operators with significant market power should avoid a price squeeze whereby the difference between their retail prices and the interconnection and/or access prices charged to competitors who provide similar retail services is not adequate to ensure sustainable competition. When a national regulatory authority calculates costs incurred in establishing a service mandated under this Directive, it is appropriate to allow a reasonable return on the capital employed including appropriate labour and building costs, with the value of capital adjusted where necessary to reflect the current valuation of assets and efficiency of operations. The method of cost recovery should be appropriate to the circumstances taking account of the need to promote efficiency, sustainable competition and deployment of very high capacity networks and thereby maximise end-user benefits, and should take in account the need to have predictable and stable wholesale prices for the benefit of all operators seeking to deploy new and enhanced networks, in accordance with Commission guidance37 . _________________ 37 Commission Recommendation 2013/466/EU of 11 September 2013 on consistent non-discrimination obligations and costing methodologies to promote competition and enhance the broadband investment environment, OJ L 251, 21.9.2013, p. 13.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 178
Recital 178
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 183
Recital 183
(183) This Directive setsrequires the Commission to set a maximum wholesale voice call termination rates for fixed and mobile networks below which the initial delegated actthrough a delegated act. The initial delegated act required for that purpose will establish the exact rate to be applied by national regulatory authorities. The initial rate will be further updated. Based on the bottom-up pure LRIC models applied by national regulators to date and applying the above criteria the voice termination rates currently vary from 0.4045 €cent per minute to 1.226 €cent per minute in mobile networks and between 0.0430 €cent per minute and 0.1400 €cent per minute in fixed networks in the most local layer of interconnection (calculated as a weighted average between peak and off- peak rates). The variation in rates is due to different local conditions and relative price structures currently existing as well as to the different timing of the model calculations across Member States. In addition, in fixed networks the level of cost efficient termination rates depends also on the network layer where the termination service is provided.
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 184
Recital 184
(184) Due to current uncertainty regarding the rate of materialisation of demand for very high capacity broadband services as well as general economies of scale and density, co-investment agreements could offer significant benefits in terms of pooling of costs and risks, enabling smaller-scale operators to invest on economically rational terms and thus promoting sustainable, long-term competition, including in areas where infrastructure-based competition might not be efficient. Where an operator with significant market power makes an open call for co-investment on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms in new network elements which significantly contribute to the deployment of very high capacity networks, the national regulatory authority should typically refrain from imposingensure that any obligations imposed pursuant to this Directive on the new network elements, are justified and proportionate subject to further review in subsequent market analyses, to the terms of the co-investment, the balance of powers between investors, and the risk that such agreements may strengthen position of significant market power or lead to the development of situations of significant impediment to effective competition. Provided due account is taken of the prospective pro-competitive effects of the co-investment at wholesale and retail level, national regulatory authorities canshould still consider it appropriate, in light of the existing market structure and dynamics developed under regulated wholesale access conditions, and in the absence of a commercial offer to that effect, to safeguard the rights of access seekers who do not participate in a given co-investment through the maintenance of existing access products or – where legacy network elements are dismantled in due course – through imposition of access products with comparableequivalent functionality to those previously available on the legacy infrastructure.
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 190
Recital 190
(190) Network owners that do not have retail market activities and whose business model is therefore limited to the provision of wholesale services to others, can be beneficial to the creation of a thriving wholesale market, with positive effects on retail competition downstream. Furthermore, their business model can be attractive to potential financial investors in less volatile infrastructure assets and with longer term perspectives on deployment of very high capacity networks. Such models should therefore be promoted and encouraged. This category of network owners should not include untertakings that were either functionally separated or voluntary separated as incentives and remaining links with the customer base might still create competition concerns. Nevertheless, the presence of a wholesale- only operator does not necessarily lead to effectively competitive retail markets, and wholesale- only operators can be designated with significant market power in particular product and geographic markets. The competition risks arising from the behaviour of operators following wholesale-only business models might be lower than for vertically integrated operators, provided the wholesale-only model is genuine and no incentives to discriminate between downstream providers exist. The regulatory response should therefore be commensurately less intrusive. On the other hand, national regulatory authorities must be able to intervene if competition problems have arisen to the detriment of end-users.
Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 191
Recital 191
(191) To facilitate the migration from legacy copper networks to next-generation networks, which is in the interests of end- users, national regulatory authorities should be able to monitor network operators' own initiatives in this respect and to establish, where necessary, an appropriate migration process, for example by means of prior notice, setting out a concrete deadline, transparency and acceptable comparableequivalent access products, once the intent and readiness by the network owner to switch off the copper network is clearly demonstrated. In order to avoid unjustified delays to the migration, national regulatory authorities should be empowered to withdraw access obligations relating to the copper network once an adequate migration process has been established.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 223
Recital 223
(223) In order to effectively support the free movement of goods, services and persons within the Union, it should be possible to use certain national numbering resources, in particular certain non- geographic numbers, in an extraterritorial manner, that is to say outside the territory of the assigning Member State throughout the territory of the Union. In view of the considerable risk of fraud with respect to interpersonal communications, such extraterritorial use should be allowed for electronic communications services with the exception of interpersonal communications services. Member States should therefore ensure that relevant national laws, in particular consumer protection rules and other rules related to the use of numbers, are enforced independently of the Member State where the rights of use for numbers have been granted. That should entail that the national regulatory and other competent authorities of those Member States where a number is used are competent to apply their national laws to the undertaking to which the number has been assigned. In addition, the national regulatory authorities of those Member States should have the possibility to request the support of the national regulatory authority responsible for the assignment of the number to assist them in enforcing the respect of the rules applicable in those Member states where the number is used. Such support measures should include dissuasive sanctions, in particular in case of a serious breach the withdrawal of the right of extraterritorial use for the numbers assigned to the undertaking concerned. The requirements on extraterritorial use should beMember states should therefore not impose additional requirements on extraterritorial use of such numbers as it would hinder their crossborder use and create a barrier to the internal market, without prejudice to Member States' powers to block, on a case- by case basis, access to numbers or services where that is justified by reasons of fraud or misuse. The extraterritorial use of numbers should be without prejudice to Union's rules related to the provision of roaming services, including those relative to preventing anomalous or abusive use of roaming services which are subject to retail price regulation and which benefit from regulated wholesale roaming rates. Member States should continue to be able to enter into specific agreements on extraterritorial use of numbering resources with third countries.
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) 'very high capacity network' means an electronic communications network which either consists wholly of optical fibre elements at least up to the distribution point at the serving location or which is capable of delivering under usual peak-time conditions similar network performance, in terms of available down- and uplink bandwidth, resilience, error- related parameters, and latency and its variation. Network performance can be considered similar regardless of whether the, meeting the needs of the most demanding, digitally intensive end-users, and in particular a network consisting of optical elements at least up to the distribution point at the serving location. Network performance should be assessed without regard to variations in end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'interpersonal communications service’' means a service normally provided for remuneration thatwhere the principal purpose of the service is devoted to enablesing direct interpersonal and interactive exchange of information via electronic communications networks between a finite number of persons, whereby the persons initiating or participating in the communication determine its recipient(s); it does not include services which enable interpersonal and interactive communication merely as a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service;
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘number-based interpersonal communications service’ means an interpersonal communications service which connects with the public switched telephone network, either by means of assigned numbering resources, i.e. a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans, or by enabling communication with a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans and where the provider of the service has substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication ;
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) 'number-independent interpersonal communications service' means an interpersonal communications service which does not connect with the public switched telephone network, either by means of assigned numbering resources, i.e. a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans, or by enabling communication with a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans or where a number-based interpersonal communication service provider does not have substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication;
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'interpersonal communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration thatwhere the principal purpose of the service is devoted to enablesing direct interpersonal and interactive exchange of information via electronic communications networks between a finite number of persons, whereby the persons initiating or participating in the communication determine its recipient(s); it does not include services which enable interpersonal and interactive communication merely as a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service;
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘number-based interpersonal communications service’ means an interpersonal communications service which connects with the public switched telephone network, either by means of assigned numbering resources, i.e. a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans, or by enabling communication with a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans, and where the provider of the service has substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication ;
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) 'number-independent interpersonal communications service' means an interpersonal communications service which does not connect with the public switched telephone network, either by means of assigned numbering resources, i.e. a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans, or by enabling communication with a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans or where a number-based interpersonal communication service provider does not have substantial control over the network used for enabling the communication;
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
National regulatory and other competent authorities may contribute within their competencies to ensuring the implementation of policies aimed at the promotion of freedom of expression and information, cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Member States shall ensure that the taking up and pursuit of the activity of a number-independent communications service provider may not be made subject to prior authorisation or any other requirement having equivalent effect.
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where an undertaking provides electronic communication services, other than number-independent interpersonal communication services, in more than one Member State, any amendment to the general authorisation by the Member State that has granted the general authorisation shall be notified to BEREC and the Member states concerned.
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to information and reporting obligations under national legislation other than the general authorisation, national regulatory and other competent authorities may only require undertakings to provide information under the general authorisation, in a common and standardised format, for rights of use or the specific obligations referred to in Article 13(2) that is proportionate and objectively justified for:
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Without prejudice to information and reporting obligations for rights of use and for the specific obligations, where an undertaking provides electronic communication services, other than number-independent interpersonal communication services, in more than one Member state, under a general authorisation, only the regulatory authority that has granted the general authorisation in accordance with article 12 may request information as referred to in paragraph 1. National regulatory authorities of other Member states concerned may request information to the national regulatory authority responsible or to BEREC. BEREC shall facilitate the coordination and exchange of information between national regulatory authorities, through the exchange of information established pursuant to Article 30 of Regulation [xxxx/xxxx/EC (BEREC Regulation)
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) contribute to the development of the internal market by removing remaining obstacles to, and facilitating convergent conditions for, investment in and the provision of electronic communications networks, associated facilities and services and electronic communications services throughout the Union, by developing common rules and predictable regulatory approaches, by favouring the effective, efficient and coordinated use of spectrum, open innovation, the establishment and development of trans-European networks, the provision, availability and interoperability of pan- European services, and end-to-end connectivity;
Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services take appropriate technical and organisational measures to appropriately manage the risks posed to security of networks and services. Having regard to the state of the art, these measures shall ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk presented. In particular, measures shall be taken to ensure that electronic communications content are encrypted from end-to-end by default, in order to prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall not impose any obligation to undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services that would result in the weakening of the security of their networks and services.
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) imposing ex ante regulatory obligations only to the extent necessary to secure effective and long term sustainable competition on the retaillevant markets concerned and relaxing or lifting such obligations as soon as that condition is fulfilled.
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 5
Article 40 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission, shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 109 with a view to specifying the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, including measures defining the circumstances, format and procedures applicable to notification requirements. The delegated acts shall be based on European and international standards to the greatest extent possible, and shall not prevent Member States from adopting addi. Without prejudice to Article 1(6) of Directive (EU) 2016/1148, Member States shall not impose any further security or notificational requirements ion orunder to pursue the objectivetakings providing public communications snet out in paragraphs 1 and 2works or publicly available electronic communications services.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. By ...[date] in order to contribute to the consistent application of measures for the security of networks and services, ENISA, shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission and BEREC issue guidelines on minimum criteria and common approaches for the security of networks and services and the promotion of the use of end-to-end encryption.
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) for undertakings providing electronic communications networks, submit to a security audit carried out by a qualified independent body or a competent authority and make the results thereof available to the competent authority. The cost of the audit shall be paid by the undertaking.
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) for undertakings providing publicly available electronic communications services, remedy any failure to meet the requirements laid down in article 40.
Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Following the assessment of information or results of security audits referred to in paragraph 2, the competent authority may issue binding instructions to the undertakings providing public communications networks, to remedy the deficiencies identified, including those regarding the measures required to remedy a breach and time-limits for implementation.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Following the assessment of the application of paragraph 2, the competent authorities may take action, if necessary, through ex post supervisory measures, when provided with evidence that an undertaking providing publicly available communication services does not meet the requirements laid down in Article 40. Such evidence may be submitted by a competent authority of another Member State where the service is provided.
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. If an undertaking providing publicly available communication services has its main establishment or a representative in a Member State, but its network and information systems are located in one or more other Member States, the competent authority of the Member State of the main establishment or of the representative and the competent authorities of those other Member States shall cooperate and assist each other as necessary. Such assistance and cooperation may cover information exchanges between the competent authorities concerned and requests to take the supervisory measures referred to in paragraph 2b.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The competent authority shall work in close cooperation with data protection authorities when addressing incidents resulting in personal data breaches.
Amendment 408 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall guarantee the independence of national regulatory authorities and of other competent authorities by ensuring that they are legally distinct from and functionally independent of all organisations providing electronic communications networks, equipment or services and of the respective government . Member States that retain ownership or control of undertakings providing electronic communications networks and/or services shall ensure effective structural separation of the regulatory function from activities associated with ownership or control.
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The head of a national regulatory authority, or, where applicable, the members of the collegiate body fulfilling that function within a national regulatory authority or their replacements, shall be appointed for a term of office of at least four years from among persons of recognised standing and professional experience, on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge and experience and following an open and transparent selection procedure. They shall not be allowed to serve more than two terms, either consecutive or not. Member States shall ensure continuity of decision-making by providing for an appropriate rotation scheme for the members of the collegiate body or the top management, such as by appointing the first members of the collegiate body for different periods, in order for their mandates, as well as that of their successors not to elapse at the same moment.
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 10, national regulatory authorities shall act independently and objectively, operate in a transparent and accountable manner in accordance with Union law and national law, have sufficient powers and shall not seek or take instructions from any other body in relation to the exercise of the tasks assigned to them under national law implementing Union law. This shall not prevent supervision in accordance with national constitutional law. Only appeal bodies set up in accordance with Article 31 shall have the power to suspend or overturn decisions by the national regulatory authorities.
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States may not impose any additional or separate notification requirements Member States shall ensure that the taking up and pursuit of the activity of a number-independent communications service provider may not be made subject to prior authorisation or any other requirement having equivalent effect.
Amendment 419 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Where an undertaking provides electronic communication services, other than number-independent interpersonal communication services, in more than one Member state, the general authorisation shall be granted by the national regulatory authority of the Member state indicated in the single notification as the provider's main establishment in the EU. This national regulatory authority shall attach to the General authorisation the specific conditions necessary in order to ensure compliance in particular with all the relevant Union and national rules related to the provision of electronic communication services applicable in the Member States where the services are provided. In case of a demonstrated breach of the relevant rules or upon request from another national regulatory authority than the one that granted the authorisation, the national regulatory authority that granted the authorisation , shall enforce the conditions attached under subparagraph 1 in accordance with Article 30, including in serious cases by withdrawing the General authorisation granted to the undertaking concerned. BEREC shall timely assess the validity of the General authorisation granted and facilitate and coordinate the exchange of information between the national regulatory authorities of the different Member States involved and ensure the appropriate coordination of work among them, and shall take decision in case of unresolved disputes.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Where an undertaking provides electronic communication services, other than number-independent interpersonal communication services, in more than one Member state, any amendment to the general authorisation by the Member state that has granted the general authorisation shall be notified to BEREC and the Member states concerned.
Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that undertakings providing electronic communications networks and services associated facilities, or associated services provide all the information, including financial information, necessary for national regulatory authorities, other competent authorities and BEREC to ensure conformity with the provisions of, or decisions made in accordance with, this Directive. In particular, national regulatory authorities shall have the power to require those undertakings to submit information concerning future network or service developments that could have an impact on the wholesale services that they make available to competitors. They may also require information on electronic communications networks and associated facilities which is disaggregated at local level and sufficiently detailed for the national regulatory authority to be able to conduct the geographical survey and to designate digital exclusion areas in accordance with Article 22. In accordance with Article 29, national regulatory authorities may sanction undertakings deliberately providing misleading, erroneous or incomplete information. This should not apply to forecasts.
Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to information and reporting obligations under national legislation other than the general authorisation, national regulatory and other competent authorities may only require undertakings to provide information under the general authorisation, in a common and standardised format, for rights of use or the specific obligations referred to in Article 13(2) that is proportionate and objectively justified for:
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Without prejudice to information and reporting obligations for rights of use and for the specific obligations, where an undertaking provides electronic communication services, other than number-independent interpersonal communication services, in more than one Member state, under a general authorisation, only the regulatory authority that has granted the general authorisation in accordance with article 12 may request information as referred to in paragraph 1. National regulatory authorities of other Member states concerned may request information to the national regulatory authority responsible or to BEREC. BEREC shall facilitate the coordination and exchange of information between national regulatory authorities, through the exchange of information established pursuant to Article 30 of Regulation [xxxx/xxxx/EC (BEREC Regulation)
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
a) a survey of the current geographic reach of broadband networks within their territory, in particular for conducting the tasks required by Articles 62 and 65 and by Article 81, as well as for imposing obligations in accordance with Article 66 and 81, as well as for the surveys required for the application of State aid rules; and
Amendment 488 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. When national regulatory authorities take measures pursuant to paragraph 3, they shall do so according to an efficient, objective, transparent and non- discriminatory procedure, whereby no undertaking is a priori excluded. Failure to provide information pursuant to paragraph 1(ba) or to respond to the call for interest pursuant to paragraph 3 may be considered as misleading information pursuant to Articles 20 or 21.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 6
Article 22 – paragraph 6
6. National regulatory authorities mayshall make data from the geographical surveys that is not subject to confidentiality or protection of business secrets directly accessible online in an open and machine readable format to allow for its reuse and make available information tools to end- users, in order to assist them to determine the availability of connectivity in different areas, with a level of detail which is useful to support their choice in terms of connectivity services, in line with national regulatory authority´s obligations regarding the protection of confidential information and business secrets.
Amendment 497 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. In cases of crossborder disputes of which the resolution involves more than one national regulatory authority and where competent national regulatory authorities have not been able to reach an agreement within a period of 3 months, after the case in question was referred to the last of those regulatory authorities, BEREC shall be empowered to adopt binding decisions to ensure a consistent resolution of the dispute.
Amendment 504 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) contribute to the development of the internal market
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. Any Member State concerned as well as the Commission may request the Radio Spectrum Policy Group to use its good offices and, where appropriate, to propose a coordinated solution in an opinion, in order to assist Member States in complying with paragraphs 1 and 2, including where compliance with paragraphs 1 and 2 involves coordination with third countries.
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 35 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) promote the development of the internal market and the crossborder provision of services as well as competition and maximise the benefits for the consumer, and overall achieve the objectives and principles set in Articles 3 and 45(2),
Amendment 556 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. TIn cases of significant risks of crossborder harmful interference, two or several Member States mayshall cooperate with each other and with the Commission and BEREC to meet their obligations under Articles 13, 46 and 54, by jointly establishing the common aspects of an authorisation process and also jointly conducting the selection process to grant individual rights of use for radio spectrum in line, where applicable with any common timetable established in accordance with Article 53. Any market participant may request the conduction of a joint selection process where providing sufficient supporting evidence that the lack of coordination creates a significant barrier to the internal market. The joint authorisation process shall meet the following criteria:
Amendment 559 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to Article s 37, 45, 46(3), 47(3), 53, where the CommissionBEREC or a national regulatory authority finds that divergences in the implementation by the national regulatory authorities or by other competent authorities of the regulatory tasks specified in this Directive may create a barrier to the internal market, the Commission may, taking the utmost account of the opinion ofand without prejudice to the powers of the Commission, BEREC, may issue a recommendation or abinding decision on the harmonised application of the provisions in this Directive and, in order to further the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3, only upon request from a national regulatory authority or upon a complaint lodged by an undertaking providing electronic communications networks or services in more than one Member State and subject to divergent implementations of this Directive.
Amendment 560 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 38 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A decision shall be adopted in the shortest possible time frame and in any case within four months, except in exceptional circumstances, from the referral of the subject matter in accordance with Regulation [xxxx/xxxx/EC (BEREC Regulation)]. The binding decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be reasoned and addressed to national regulatory authorities concerned.
Amendment 561 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that national regulatory and other competent authorities take the utmost account of recommendationsimplement the decisions taken pursuant to paragraph 1 in carrying out their tasks. Where a national regulatory authority or other competent authority chooses not to follow a recommendation, it shall inform the Commission, giving the reasons for its position.
Amendment 562 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 3 – point a – paragraph 2 – indent 1
Article 38 – paragraph 3 – point a – paragraph 2 – indent 1
- after at least two years following the adoption of a Commission Recommendation dealing with the same matterBEREC decision, and
Amendment 563 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall encourage the use of the standards and/or specifications referred to in paragraph 1, for the provision of services, technical interfaces and/or network functions, to the extent strictly necessary to ensure interoperability of services, end-to-end connectivity, facilitation of switching and to improve freedom of choice for users.
Amendment 568 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services take appropriate technical and organisational measures to appropriately manage the risks posed to security of networks and services. Having regard to the state of the art, these measures shall ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk presented. In particular, measures shall be taken to ensure that electronic communications content are encrypted from end-to-end by default, in order to prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.
Amendment 570 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall not impose any obligation to undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services that would result in the weakening of the security of their networks and services.
Amendment 573 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point e
Article 40 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point e
Amendment 577 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 5
Article 40 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission, shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 109 with a view to specifying the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, including measures defining the circumstances, format and procedures applicable to notification requirements. The delegated acts shall be based on European and international standards to the greatest extent possible, and shall not prevent Member States from adopting additional requirements in order to pursue the objectives set out in paragraphs 1 and 2. Where Member States impose additional requirements on undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services in more than one Member state, they should notify these measures to the Commission and ENISA. ENISA shall assist Member states in coordinating the measures taken to avoid duplication or diverging requirements that may create security risks and barriers to the internal market.
Amendment 578 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. By ...[date] in order to contribute to the consistent application of measures for the security of networks and services, ENISA, shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission and BEREC issue guidelines on minimum criteria and common approaches for the security of networks and services and the promotion of the use of end-to-end encryption.
Amendment 610 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 45 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the finding of a lack of market demand for the use of the harmonised band is based on a public consultation in line with Article 23 and on a forward-looking assessment of the market competitive conditions ;
Amendment 620 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall facilitate the use of radio spectrum, including shared use, under general authorisations and limit the granting of individual rights of use for radio spectrum to situations where such rights are necessary to maximise efficient use in the light of demand and, taking into account the criteria set out in the second subparagraph. In all other cases, they shall set out the conditions for the use of radio spectrum in a general authorisation.
Amendment 626 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 627 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Amendment 629 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) the need to protect againstavoid harmful interference;
Amendment 630 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) the requirements for a reliable sharing arrangement, where appropriatesafeguard efficient use of spectrum;
Amendment 631 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d
(d) the appropriate level of receiver resilience to ensure technical quality of communications or service ;
Amendment 634 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point e
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point e
(e) fulfil other objectives of general interest as defined by Member States in conformity with Union law.
Amendment 636 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
2. Whenre applying a general authorisation or individual rights taking in account measures adopted under Decision No 676/2002/EC where theropriate, Member States shall consider the possibility to authorise the use of radio spectrum bansed concerned has been harmonised, Member States shall seek to minimise problems of harmful interference, including in cases of shared use of radio spectrum on the basis of a combination of a combination of general authorisation and individual rights of use. They shall in particular consider the possibility of the gradual transfer from general authorisation andto individual rights of use. In so doing, t where necessary to foster innovation and facilitate market entry of smaller market participants. They shall hfave regard to the need:our technological solutions for the management of potential harmful interference with a view to choose the least restrictive authorisation regime possible.
Amendment 639 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 1
Amendment 640 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 2
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 2
Amendment 642 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 3
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 3
Amendment 643 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 4
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – indent 4
Amendment 645 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
When authorising the shared use of spectrum, Member States shall minimise the restrictions to the use of radio spectrum to what is necessary to avoid harmful interference, including by limiting to the best extent possible the application of the non-interference, non- protection principle. Where such principles shall apply, Member States shall take measures to ensure protection against out-of-and interference from adjacent bands.
Amendment 648 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. When taking a decision pursuant to paragraph 1 with a view to facilitating the shared use of radio spectrum, the competent authoritiMember States shall ensure that the rules and conditions for the shared use of radio spectrum where applied are clearly set out and concretely specified in the acts of authorisation.
Amendment 651 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 46 – paragraph 3
Article 46 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may, taking utmost account of the opinion of the Radio Spectrum Policy Group, adopt implementing measures on the modalities of application of the criteria, rules and conditions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 24 with regard to harmonised radio spectrum. It shall adopt these measures in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 110(4).
Amendment 663 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. Where Member States authorise the use of radio spectrum through individual rights of use for a limited period of time, they shall ensure that the authorisation is granted for a period that is appropriate in view of the objective pursued taking due account of the need to ensure effective and efficient use and, promote efficient investments, including by allowing for an appropriate period for investment amortisation , promote innovation and allow for the evolution of services and technologies.
Amendment 670 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2
2. Where Member States grant rights of use for harmonised radio spectrum for a limited period of time, those rights of use for harmonised radio spectrum shall be valid for a maximum duration of at least 25 years, except in the case of temporary rights, temporary extension of rights pursuant to paragraph 3 and rights for secondary use in harmonised bands. Where rights of use have been granted for a duration of 25 years, Member states shall conduct reviews at regular intervals of every 5 years to assess if the use of spectrum is the most efficient in light of technological or market evolution, and where justified and necessary shall amend such rights in accordance with articles 50 and 51.
Amendment 703 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. Competent authorities shall not prevent providers of public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services from allowing access to their networks to the public, through radio local area networks, which may be located at an end-user's premises, subject to compliance with the applicable general authorisation conditions and the prior informed agreement of the end-user. Individuals providing access to their networks for non-commercial purposes shall not be liable for information transmitted by third parties through the use of such access.
Amendment 703 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 5
Article 102 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that caller location information is available to the PSAP without delay after the emergency communication is set up. This shall include both network-based location information and if available, handset- derived caller location information. Member States shall ensure that the establishment and the transmission of the caller location information are free of charge for the end-user and to the authority handling the emergency communication with regard to all emergency communications to the single European emergency number ‘112’. Member States may extend that obligation to cover emergency communications to national emergency numbers. Competent regulatory authorities shall lay down criteria for the accuracy and reliability of the caller location information provided.
Amendment 732 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point i
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point i
(i) to the extent necessary to ensure interoperability of interpersonal communications services and may include obligations relating to the use and implementation of standards or specifications listed in Article 39(1) or of any other relevant European or international standards; andsuch obligations shall not lead to the weakening of security standards of these services.
Amendment 733 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point ii
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – point ii
(ii) where the Commission, on the basis of a report that it had requested from BEREC, has found an appreciable threat to effective access to emergency services or to end-to-end connectivity between end- users within one or several Member States or throughout the European Union and has adopted implementing measures specifying the nature and scope of any obligations that may be imposed, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 110(4). Member states may not impose any additional obligations.
Amendment 735 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 770 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – point a
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – point a
(a) a viable and similar alternative means of access to end-users provided by the network operator and suitable for the provision of very high capacity networks is made available to any undertaking, provided that thesuch access is offered onunder fair and reasonable terms and conditions to a very high capacity network by an undertaking meeting the criteria listed in Article 77 paragraphs (a) and (b); and
Amendment 794 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Two or more undertakings may each be deemed to enjoy a position equivalent to having significant market power when they have the possibility to significantly impede effective competition, taking into account the relevant markets including but not limited to the market shares of other market participants, the market power of an undertaking on closely related markets, barriers to entry, market concentration, product differentiation, capacity constraints and switching costs.
Amendment 797 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
3. Where an undertaking has significant market power on a specific market (the first market), it may also be designated as having significant market power on a closely related market (the second market), where the links between the two markets are such as to allow the market power held in the first market to be leveraged into the second market, thereby strengthening the market power of the undertaking. Consequently, remedies aimed at preventing such leverage may be applied in the second market pursuant to this Directive.
Amendment 801 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 62 – paragraph 2
Article 62 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall publish, at the latest on the date of entry into force of this Directive, guidelines for market analysis and the assessment of significant market power (hereinafter ‘the SMP guidelines’), which shall be in accordance with the principles of competition law. The SMP guidelines shall in particular provide detailed guidance and criteria to assess situations that give rise to a significant impediment to effective competition.
Amendment 805 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 62 – paragraph 3
Article 62 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities shall, taking the utmost account of the Recommendation and the SMP guidelines, define relevant markets appropriate to national circumstances, in particular relevant geographic markets within their territory, in accordance with the principles of competition law. National regulatory authorities shall take into account the results of the geographical survey conducted in accordance with Article 22(1). They shall follow the procedures referred to in Articles 23 and 32 before defining the markets that differ from those identified in the Recommendation.
Amendment 811 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
BEREC shall conduct an analysis of transnational end-user demand for products and services that are provided within the Union in one or more of the markets listed in the Recommendation, if it receives a reasoned request providing supporting evidence from the Commission or, from at least two of the national regulatory authorities concerned indicating that there is a serious demand problem to be addressed. BEREC may also conduct such analysis if it receives a reasoned request from market participants providing sufficient supporting evidence and considers there is a serious demand problem to be addressed. BEREC's analysis is without prejudice to any findings of transnational markets in accordance with Article 63(1) and to any findings of national or sub-national geographical markets by national regulatory authorities in accordance with Article 62(3), or upon a reasoned request from market participants, indicating that existing wholesale or retail products and services do not allow to meet a transnational demand, across more than one member state, and considers there is a serious demand problem to be addressed.
Amendment 812 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 813 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 815 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 2
Article 64 – paragraph 2
2. On the basis of BEREC guidelines referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may adopt a Decision pursuant to Article 38 to harmonise the technical specifications of wholesale access products capable of meeting such identified transnational demand, when they are imposed by national regulatory authorities on operators designated with significant market power in markets where such access products are supplied, as defined according to national circumstances. Article 38(3)(a) second subparagraph first indent shall not apply in such a caseBEREC may, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, issue guidelines on common approaches for national regulatory authorities to meet the identified transnational demand providing the basis for convergence of wholesale access products across the Union. National regulatory authorities shall take into utmost account these guidelines when performing their regulatory tasks within their jurisdiction, without prejudice to each national regulatory authority decision on the appropriateness of wholesale access products that should be imposed in specific local circumstances.
Amendment 824 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the existence of market developments which may increase the likelihood of the relevant market tending towards effective competition, such as those commercial co-investment or access agreements between operators which benefit competitive dynamics sustainably;
Amendment 840 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 65 – paragraph 4
Article 65 – paragraph 4
4. Where a national regulatory authority determines that, in a relevant market the imposition of regulatory obligations in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article is justified, it shall identify any undertakings which individually or jointly have a significant market power , or might significantly impede effective competition on that relevant market in accordance with Article 61. The national regulatory authority shall impose on such undertakings appropriate specific regulatory obligations in accordance with Article 66 or maintain or amend such obligations where they already exist if it considers that one or more retail markets would not be effectively competitive in the absence of those obligations. In the case of significant impediment to effective competition, the national regulatory authority shall consider the proper circumstances of the case, take due account of the need for proportionality and consider the adoption of the least burdensome remedies.
Amendment 852 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 66 – paragraph 4
Article 66 – paragraph 4
4. Obligations imposed in accordance with this Article shall be based on the nature of the problem identified, in particular at retail levelthe relevant markets to safeguard long term sustainable competition, and where appropriate taking into account the identification of transnational demand pursuant to Article 64. They shall be proportionate, have regard to the costs and benefits, and be justified in the light of the objectives laid down in Article 3 of this Directive. Such obligations shall only be imposed following consultation in accordance with Articles 23 and 32. In cases of one or more undertakings considered as significantly impeding effective competition, national regulatory authorities shall take due account of the specific circumstances of the case and consider the least burdensome remedies, taking into account their proportionality and their potential benefits for end-users.
Amendment 884 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 70 – paragraph 1
Article 70 – paragraph 1
1. A national regulatory authority may, in accordance with Article 66, impose obligations on operators to meet reasonable requests for access to, and use of, civil engineering including, without limitation, buildings or entries to buildings, building cables including wiring, antennae, towers and other supporting constructions, poles, masts, ducts, conduits, inspection chambers, manholes, and cabinets, in situations where the market analysis indicates that denial of access or access given under unreasonable terms and conditions having a similar effect would hinder the emergence of along-term sustainable competitive market at the retail levelon in the relevant markets and would not be in the end-user's interest.
Amendment 892 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 70 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 70 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A national regulatory authority shall ensure that where access to civil engineering such as access to ducts is limited due to availability, alternatives means of access such as dark fiber are imposed in accordance with article 71.
Amendment 909 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 71 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 947 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When national regulatory authorities are considering the appropriateness of imposing any of the possible specific obligations referred in paragraph 1, and in particular when assessing, in conformity with the principle of proportionality, whether and how such obligations should be imposed, they shall analyse whether other forms of access to wholesale inputs either on the same or a related wholesale market, would already be sufficient to address the identified problem atin the retail levellevant markets. The assessment shall include existing or prospective commercial access offers, regulated access pursuant to Article 59, or existing or contemplated regulated access to other wholesale inputs pursuant to this Article. They shall take account in particular of the following factors:
Amendment 952 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) the need to ensure technology neutrality enabling access seekers to design and manage their own network
Amendment 966 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 71 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the need to safeguard competition in the long term, with particular attention to economically efficient infrastructure- based competition and to sustainable competition based on co-investment in networks;
Amendment 977 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
In determining whether or not price control obligations would be appropriate, national regulatory authorities shall take into account long-term end-user interests related to the deployment and take-up of next-generation networks, and in particular of very high capacity networks. In particular, to encourage investments by the operator, including in next-generation networks, national regulatory authorities shall take into account the investment made by the operator. Where the national regulatory authorities deem price controls appropriate, they shall allow the operator a reasonable rate of return on adequate capital employed, taking into account any risks specific to a particular new investment network project.
Amendment 979 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 992 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 73 – paragraph 4
Article 73 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1002 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 74 – title
Article 74 – title
Regulatory treatment of new network elements of very high capacity networks
Amendment 1007 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
A national regulatory authority shall not imposewhich intends to impose or maintain obligations as regards new network elements that are part of the relevant market on wof very hicgh it intends to impose or maintain obligationcapacity networks in accordance with Articles 66 and Articles 67 to 72 and that the operator designated as significant market power on that relevant market has deployed or is planning to deploy, ifshall take into account the following cumulative conditions are metto ensure such obligations are proportionate and justified :
Amendment 1015 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the deployment of the new network elements is opensubject to a co-investment offers according to a transparent process and on terms which favour sustainable competition in the long term including inter aliaagreement where co-investment terms are open to any potential co-investors and are agreed between undertakings on the basis of fair, reasonable and, non- discriminatory terms offered to potential co-investors;, including technical and financial terms ; favour sustainable competition in the long term, flexibility in terms of the value and timing of the commitment provided by each co-investor; possibility to increase such commitment in the future; reciprocal rights awarded by the co- investors after the deployment of the co- invested infrastructure;
Amendment 1030 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
When assessing co-investment offterms and processes referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph, national regulatory authorities shall ensure that those offterms and processes comply with the criteria set out in Annex IV and are compliant with competition law. When co-investment terms comply with Annex IV but may create a situation of significant impediment to effective competition, national regulatory authorities shall ensure that proportionate and justified obligations are imposed to address the situation in accordance with articles 66 to 72.
Amendment 1047 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 77 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 77 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) the undertaking is not a separated untertaking as referred to in article 75 and 76 ;
Amendment 1049 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 77 – paragraph 2
Article 77 – paragraph 2
2. If the national regulatory authority concludes that the conditions laid down in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article are fulfilled, it may only impose on that undertaking obligations pursuant to Articles 70 or 712.
Amendment 1053 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The national regulatory authority shall ensure that the decommissioning process includes a transparent timetable and conditions, including inter alia a concrete deadline, an appropriate period of notice and for transition, and establishes the availability of alternative comparableequivalent products providing access to network elements substituting the decommissioned infrastructure if necessary to safeguard competition and the rights of end-users.
Amendment 1055 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 78 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) the access provider has demonstrably established the appropriate conditions for migration, including making available a comparable alternativen equivalent access product enabling to reach the same end- users, as was available using the legacy infrastructure; and
Amendment 1067 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 88 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 88 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Where the right of use for numbers includes their extraterritorial use within the Union in accordance with Article 87(4), the national regulatory authority shall attach to the right of use specific conditions in order to ensure compliance with all the relevant national consumer protection rules and national laws related to the use of numbers applicable in the Member States where the numbers are used. Member states may not impose additional obligations to these rights of use therafter.
Amendment 1111 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – subheading 1
Annex IV – subheading 1
CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING CO- INVESTMENT OFFTERMS
Amendment 1114 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – introductory part
When assessing a co-investment offerterms pursuant to Article 74 (1), the national regulatory authority shall verify whether the following criteria have been met:
Amendment 1118 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) The co-investment offerterms shall be transparent:
Amendment 1120 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 1
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point b – indent 1
- the offer isterms are available and easily identified on the website of the SMP operator;
Amendment 1127 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) The co-investment offerterms shall include terms to potential co-investors which favour sustainable competition in the long term, in particular:
Amendment 1142 #
Proposal for a directive
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point d
Annex IV – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) The co-investment offerterms shall ensure a sustainable investment likely to meet future needs, by deploying new network elements that contribute significantly to the deployment of very high capacity networks.