EUI Florence October 29, 2012 Prof Annetje Ottow Universiteit Utrecht http://cmpf.eui.eu/events/policy-conference.aspx

1. Universiteit Utrecht
The difference between telecoms &
media regulators
October 29, 2012
Prof Annetje Ottow
Florence

2. Universiteit Utrecht
Institutional design (1)
• NO single model of institutional design
• Correlation between regulation and
institutional design
• The existence of the current structure is
the result of historical and political factors
and the old market structure

3. Universiteit Utrecht
Institutional design (2)
• Important: distinction between
institution/authority and the
power/authority to intervene
• Integrated regulator does not necessarily
mean integration of regulation and actions

4. Universiteit Utrecht
Institutional design (3)
• OPTA: telecom and post regulator
• Commissariaat voor de Media: media
regulator
• Regulatory competition?
• How to divide the tasks between the
regulators?

5. Universiteit Utrecht
Traditional view on regulation
• Structural division of networks: TV
(media) and telecommunications
• No cross overs: complete isolation of both
regimes
• Content regulation vs. Transmission
(netwok) regulation

6. Universiteit Utrecht
Traditional view on supervision
Media: Communications:
• content • Transmission of the
content by signals
• Services delivered
over networks • Netwoks and facilities

7. Universiteit Utrecht
Traditional view on the market
• Source: Rand Report (2008), figure 1

8. Universiteit Utrecht
Different models of institutional
design
MODEL I: coordination model
-- different supervisors coordinate their
interventions
MODEL II: convergence model
-- one integrated supervisor acts on the
basis of converged regulation

9. Universiteit Utrecht
Model I: coordination model
• Traditional model: existing structures
remain in place
• Coordination instruments are used:
- consultation
- coordination procedures
- giving advice in the decision
making process

10. Universiteit Utrecht
Principle of coordination
media communications
Coordination protocol:
* overlapping competences?
* coordination of procedures
* complex procedures and decisions

11. Universiteit Utrecht
Model II: convergence model
• Integrated policy, powers and instruments
• Concept of concurrent powers
• Less coordination: internal coordination is
still required (different cultures!)

12. Universiteit Utrecht
Case of OFCOM
• Convergence model of the institutional
design
• Mix of activities and responsabilities:
* has powers to intervene at all levels
of the information delivery chain
* including spectrum allocation and
management
* general convergence policy
(”regulation for convergence”)

13. Universiteit Utrecht
Importance of integration
• Importance of spectrum policy:
competitive and innovative instrument in
the near future
• Net neutrality: capacity problems may
cause discrimination on the networks
• Coordination of policy instruments will be
necessary!!!

14. Universiteit Utrecht
Institutional design and
convergence
• Due to technical developments the
market landscape is changing:
CONVERGENCE
------ but this is not always followed by
restructering the institutional and
regulatory landscape

15. Universiteit Utrecht
Defining Convergence
• Tendency for services to merge into one
offering that combines the features of the
original product
• Convergence of companies: active on
different markets coming together
• In transmission context: integrated delivery
via one single channel/network
• User perspective: one single platform or
device
• Regulatory convergence: one single
framework

16. Universiteit Utrecht
Framework Directive 2002/21/EC
and 2009/140/EC
Recital 5:
(i) The convergence of telecommunications,
media and information technology
means all transmission networks and
services should be covered by a single
regulatory framework
(ii) It is necessary to separate the
regulation of transmission from the
regulation of content

17. Universiteit Utrecht
Problem of distinction (1)
• How to divide between media and
communication regulation?
• Dutch EU infringement procedure by the
European Commission

18. Universiteit Utrecht
Problem of distinction (2)
Connection
content publisher Devices consumer
provider
usage
transmission
Media/TV
programs

19. Universiteit Utrecht
Regulation of cable TV networks NL
(1)
Private agreement Public regulation
• Content regulation • Framework Directive
is applicable (OPTA,
European
• Price regulation on Commission,
the basis of contract administrative Court)
• Framework directive • Intervention is not
is not applicable: appropriate (retail
OPTA has no and whole sale
authority regulation)

20. Universiteit Utrecht
Regulation of cable TV networks NL
(2)
• New legislation introduced by Parliament:
media regulator is obliged by law to
impose access obligations on the TV cable
providers on cost based tariffs
• Commissariaat has to implement this
• European Commission: contrary to EU
law, started infraction procedure against
the NL
• Transmission and not content

21. Universiteit Utrecht
UPC case in The Netherlands
Main question: is the communications
regulation applicable?
• Sale of the cable network in Amsterdam
by the council to UPC
• Price cap agreed in the sale agreement
• UPC claims that this agreement is nul and
void (in conflict with Framework Directive)
• Preliminary question to the European
Court of Justice: hearing