European debate on future audiovisual regulation

© Cullen International SA 2015

European debate on future

audiovisual regulation

Laura Sboarina

São Paulo August 4, 2015


Media Telecoms Digital

Economy Postal

Competition Law

DO

WHAT

WE REGULATORY

DO

WHAT

WE INTELLIGENCE

© Cullen International SA 2015 3 3

Outline

TV sector: EU and Latam in comparison

Main principles of EU audiovisual regulation

challenged by convergence

How should future audiovisual regulation look

like?


Outline




How should future audiovisual regulation look

like?


1. Strong role of public service broadcasters in the EU

Main differences


Main differences

2. Online advertising

ready to start

cannibalizing TV

advertising in some EU

markets


Main differences

3. Digital take-up almost completed in WE EU

(source: IHS)


...but niche of viewing time and not eating pay TV’s lunch yet

1. Growth in connected devices & video OTT services

Common trend toward non-linear consumption


Common regulatory issues

How to regulate OTT video services and avoid

regulatory assimetries?

How to keep fair competition (access to

platforms, access to premium content, etc.)?


Common regulatory issues

How to sustain production of

local/national content?

How to fight piracy?

How to ensure protection of viewers in a

convergent environment?


Outline




How should future audiovisual regulation look like?


Telecoms

e-commerce Copyright

Audiovisual Competition

Net neutrality Advertising (limit/quality)

Promotion of EU works

Protecting minors

Liability of online intermediaries

IPR enforcement

Copyright in the digital world

TV signal/content

integrity

Online contracting

Consumer

protection online

Must-carry

EU frameworks

Accessibility

Hate speech

Mergers

State aid


Audiovisual content rules

Main principles

Technological neutrality

TV Like

Principle purpose

Editorial responsibility

1. Material jurisdiction


TV channel

VOD streaming service

Catch up TV

service

Internet service provider

Video sharing

platform Network operator

TV platform

(no own channels)

Social media

Search engine


E-commerce

Telecoms rules

EDITORIAL RESPONSIBILITY

& PRINCIPAL PURPOSE

Online newspaper

with video content



E-commerce

Telecoms rules

EDITORIAL RESPONSIBILITY

& PRINCIPAL PURPOSE


• Protection of viewers

• Level playing field

• Free-riding

• Gate-keeping


Outline




How should future audiovisual regulation look like?


Extend scope of content rules (or some of them) to online

providers offering audiovisual content?

Material jurisdiction

EU policy options

Incentivise voluntary commitments by new online players to

protect users?

Cross-sector assessment of the role of ‘online platforms’


Material jurisdiction

Views of national governments

Remove regulatory

asymmetries between

regulated and

unregulated online

providers competing in

the same market

Against extension of

rules to unregulated

online services to

protect freedom of

expression

Against extension of rules

to unregulated online

services to avoid burden on

small emerging business/

authorities

Is there a need for

extending existing must-

carry rules?

Concerns about the

gate-keeping role of

smart TV

manufactures


New legal category for online

platforms (those who organise, list,

recommend, prioritise audiovisual

content)

Future audiovisual rules

Interesting ideas

Cross-sector application

Supervised voluntary commitment

CSA


Ofcom

‘Safe zones’ on services with mass

reach/high impact where audiences are

protected:

identified by TV platforms operators/online

intermediaries

with specific EPG positions


Interesting ideas



Main principles

2. Lighter

rules for non-

linear (greater

control)

Non- linear

Linear


Non-linear

Linear

• on same screen

• targeting the same audience

• offering the same content

INCREASINGLY COMPETING


• Introduce additional self- (or co-regulatory) measures

to protect minors in non-linear services


EU policy options

• Level playing field between linear and non-linear

services:

• Remove quantitative advertising limits for linear

services

• Mandate specific methods to promote EU

productions in non-linear services



Views of national governments

Level playing field Graduated

approach

Services still differ for pricing and

chronology

Traditional TV has a larger

audience/ greater impact on

society

Users cannot always control ads in

non-linear services

Users unable to distinguish and

unaware of the level of protection


Regulation tuned on the scale of the

provider measured in audience of

revenues, or

graduated approach based on

content rather than form of delivery:

specific rules for news, children

programmes, political content and

lighter rules for entertainment.


Interesting ideas



Main principles

Single market objective

Country of origin

No jurisdiction over non-EU services

3. Territorial jurisdiction


What if service delivered online from

non-EU country?

Established in the EU

country with

favourable tax

regime and light

touch regulation

Global online players

Established

outside the EU


EU timeline

Next few years are key

By end 2015

Proposal for copyright revision

By mid 2016

Proposal for revision of audiovisual

content rules

2016

Proposal for revision of

telecoms rules

Undefined time

(Possible) targeted changes to e-commerce rules to review intermediaries liability regime


For any other questions

contact me at

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



European debate on future audiovisual regulation

Business

Transcript of European debate on future audiovisual regulation