Paquet Telecom 2017/amendements ITRE/Voting list

From La Quadrature du Net
< Paquet Telecom 2017‎ | amendements ITRE
Revision as of 13:57, 19 May 2017 by Adc (talk | contribs) (Amendment 742 +)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Voting list des amendements déposés en commission ITRE

Amendment 297 ++

Amendment 297
Morten Helveg Petersen
ALDE
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – indent 1

- obligations imposed by national law in accordance with Union law or by Union law in respect of services provided using electronic communications networks and services ; - measures taken at Union or national level, in compliance with Union law, to pursue general interest objectives, in particular relating to content regulation and audio-visual policy. - the provisions of Directive 2014/53/EU.

- obligations imposed by national law in accordance with Union law or by Union law in respect of services provided using electronic communications networks and services ; - measures taken at Union or national level, in compliance with Union law, to pursue general interest objectives, in particular relating to the protection of personal data and privacy, content regulation and audio-visual policy


Take into account the protection of personal data and privacy, content regulation and audio-visual policy


Amendment 298 ++

Amendment 298
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

(1) ‘electronic communications network’ means transmission systems, whether or not based on a permanent infrastructure or centralised administration capacity, and, where applicable, switching or routing equipment and other resources, including network elements which are not active, which permit the conveyance of signals by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic means, including satellite networks, fixed (circuit- and packet-switched, including Internet) and mobile terrestrial networks, electricity cable systems, to the extent that they are used for the purpose of transmitting signals, networks used for radio and television broadcasting, and cable television networks, irrespective of the type of information conveyed;

(1) ‘electronic communications network’ means transmission systems, whether or not based on a permanent infrastructure or centralised administration capacity, and, where applicable, switching or routing equipment and other resources, including network elements which are not active, which permit the conveyance of signals by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic means, including satellite networks, fixed (circuit- and packet-switched, including Internet) and mobile terrestrial networks, electricity cable systems, to the extent that they are used for the purpose of transmitting signals, networks used for radio and television broadcasting, and cable television networks, irrespective of the type of information conveyed; it does not include network elements managed by individuals in the context of not-for-profit activities;

Justification: Individuals participating in a not-for-profit network (such as radio local area networks) or providing not-for-profit services shall not be subject to the obligations imposed on legal persons providing networks or services. Specifically, the strict obligations provided by the Directive 2002/58/CE would be disproportionate and impracticable if imposed on individual volunteers, who should only be subject to the obligations set by the General Data Protection Regulation.


Inclusion des orga non-profit.


Amendment 299 -

Amendment 299
Evžen Tošenovský
ECR
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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.

(2) 'very high capacity network' means an publicly available electronic communications network which either consists wholly or partially of optical fibre elements.


Dérégulation sur la QoS + dérégulation sur les réseaux privés.


Amendment 301 +

Amendment 301
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.

(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 corresponding in the fixed-line connection case to the premises and in the mobile connection case to the base station, or which is capable of delivering under usual peak-time conditions at least the same network performance in terms of available down- and uplink bandwidth, resilience, error-related parameters, and latency and its variation. Network performance can be considered at least the same regardless of whether the end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.

Justification: Clarification included from the respective Recital 13. Moreover, strengthening the performance benchmark while lifting its upper limit. This clarifies that – independent of the used technology – better performing infrastructures would also be considered ‘very high capacity’.


Enhance def


Amendment 312 +

Amendment 312
Edouard Martin
S&D
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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.

(2) 'very high capacity network' means an electronic communications network which either consists wholly of optical fibre elements at least up to the premises or which is capable of delivering under usual peak-time conditions at least 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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.


Enhance def


Amendment 313 +

Amendment 313
Anne Sander, Françoise Grossetête
S&D
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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.

(2) 'very high capacity network' means an electronic communications network which either consists wholly of optical fibre elements at least up to the premises or which is capable of delivering under usual peak-time conditions at least the same 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 end-user experience varies due to the inherently different characteristics of the medium by which the network ultimately connects with the network termination point.


Same as 312


Amendment 316 ++

Amendment 316
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4

(4) ‘electronic communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration via electronic communications networks, which encompasses 'internet access service' as defined in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120; and/or 'interpersonal communications service'; and/or services consisting wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals such as transmission services used for the provision of machine-to-machine services and for broadcasting, but excludes services providing, or exercising editorial control over, content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services;

(4) ‘electronic communications service’ means a service provided for remuneration via electronic communications networks, which encompasses 'internet access service' as defined in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/2120; and/or 'interpersonal communications service'; and/or services consisting wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals such as transmission services used for the provision of machine-to-machine services and for broadcasting, but excludes services providing, or exercising editorial control over, content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services as well as not-for-profit-services provided by individuals;

Justification: Individuals participating in a not-for-profit network (such as radio local area networks) or providing not-for-profit services shall not be subject to the obligations imposed on legal persons providing networks or services. Specifically, the strict obligations provided by the Directive 2002/58/CE would be disproportionate and impracticable if imposed on individual volunteers, who should only be subject to the obligations set by the General Data Protection Regulation.


inclusion des non-profit 


Amendment 318 -

Amendment 318
Kaja Kallas
ALDE
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5

(5) 'interpersonal communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration that enables 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;

(5) 'interpersonal communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration where the principal purpose of the service is devoted to enabling 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);

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Excludes ancillary interpersonal communication services from the scope

Amendment 319 -

Amendment 319
Barbara Kappel, Angelo Ciocca, Lorenzo Fontana
ENF
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5

(5) 'interpersonal communications service’ means a service normally provided for remuneration that enables 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;

(5) 'interpersonal communications service' means an electronic communications service whose primary purpose is to enable normally provided for remuneration that enables 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 an a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service;


Excludes ancillary interpersonal communication services from the scope


Amendment 325 -

Amendment 325
Barbara Kappel, Angelo Ciocca, Lorenzo Fontana
ENF
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;

(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 the national telephone numbering plan, or by enabling communication with a number or numbers in national or international telephone numbering plans; it does not include information society services that allow interpersonal and interactive communication as a secondary feature;


Excludes information society services that allow interpersonal and interactive communication as a secondary feature from the scope


Amendment 333 ++

Amendment 333
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23

(23) ‘general authorisation’ means a legal framework established by the Member State ensuring rights for the provision of electronic communications networks or services and laying down sector-specific obligations that may apply to all or to specific types of electronic communications networks and services, in accordance with this Directive.

(23) ‘general authorisation’ means a legal framework established by the Member State ensuring rights for the provision of electronic communications networks or services and laying down sector-specific obligations that may apply to all or to specific types of electronic communications networks and services, in accordance with this Directive, excluding not-for-profit-services provided by individuals.


Excluding not-for-profit-services provided by individuals is a way to enable innovation and development of services by individuals who would be discouraged from proposing services with administrative obligations


Amendment 334 -

Amendment 334
Barbara Kappel, Angelo Ciocca, Lorenzo Fontana
ENF
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 26

(26) 'shared use of radio spectrum' means access by two or more users to use the same frequencies under a defined sharing arrangement, authorised by a national regulatory authority on the basis of a general authorisation, individual rights of use or a combination thereof, including regulatory approaches such as licenced shared access aiming to facilitate the shared use of a frequency band, subject to a binding agreement of all parties involved, in accordance with sharing rules as included in their rights of use so as to guarantee to all users predictable and reliable sharing arrangements, and without prejudice to the application of competition law;

(26) 'shared use of radio spectrum' means access by two or more users to use the same frequencies under a defined sharing arrangement, authorised by a national regulatory authority on the basis of a general authorisation, individual rights of use or a combination thereof;


This AM deletes the part that promotes the development of licenced shared access.


Amendment 343 +

Amendment 343
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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 cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

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.

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Promotes freedom of expression and information


Amendment 344 +

Amendment 344
Morten Helveg Petersen
ALDE
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 cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

National regulatory and other competent authorities may contribute within their competencies to ensuring the implementation of policies aimed at the protection of personal data and privacy, the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.


Promotes the protection of personal data and privacy


Amendment 345 +

Amendment 345
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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 cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

National regulatory and other competent authorities shall contribute within their competencies to ensuring the implementation of policies aimed at the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

Justification: Despite the fact that the Directive does not lay down substantive rules regarding content and only on networks and services, national authorities need to play close attention to the impact that markets have on each other. The degree of competition in telecommunications markets can significantly impact media and content pluralism in Europe, reducing consumers’ ability to access the content and services of their choice.


This AM give the NRAs the obligation to take into account policies such as media pluralism


Amendment 346 +

Amendment 346
José Blanco López, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz
S&D
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 cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

National regulatory and other competent authorities shall contribute within their competencies to ensuring the implementation of policies aimed at the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

Justification: This provision aims at ensuring a strong commitment of NRA and other competent authorities with the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, and media pluralism.


Same as AM 344 - This AM give the NRAs the obligation to take into account policies such as media pluralism


Amendment 347 +

Amendment 347
David Borrelli, Dario Tamburrano
EFDD
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 cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

National regulatory and other competent authorities shall contribute within their competencies to ensuring the implementation of policies aimed at the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity, as well as media pluralism.

Justification: National authorities need to play close attention to the impact that markets have on each other.


Same as AM 344 - This AM give the NRAs the obligation to take into account policies such as media pluralism


Amendment 348 +

Amendment 348
Pervenche Berès
S&D
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Les autorités de régulation nationales et les autres autorités compétentes peuvent contribuer, dans la limite de leurs compétences, à la mise en œuvre des politiques visant à promouvoir la diversité culturelle et linguistique ainsi que le pluralisme dans les médias.

Les autorités de régulation nationales et les autres autorités compétentes contribuent, dans la limite de leurs compétences, à la mise en œuvre des politiques visant à promouvoir la diversité culturelle et linguistique ainsi que le pluralisme dans les médias.


Same as AM 344 - This AM give the NRAs the obligation to take into account policies such as media pluralism


Amendment 356 +

Amendment 356
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) promote access to, and take-up of, very high capacity data connectivity, both fixed and mobile, by all Union citizens and businesses;

(a) promote the availability and affordability of and access to very high capacity data connectivity, both fixed and mobile and of interpersonal communications services, by all Union citizens and businesses;

Justification: In a market economy where consumers can leverage their collective power, it should always be them (and not governments, regulators or companies) who freely decide whether they want to take up a new service or not. The objective of EU telecom regulation has always been to guide regulatory intervention towards the offer side of the market, ensuring wholesale and retail competition, and the availability of services and networks. If regulation would aim to guide the demand side of the market too, it could condition the promotion of efficiency, transparency and fairness in markets, and of consumer protection. The regulatory framework must therefore continue focusing on availability and affordability of services.


comment


Amendment 357 +

Amendment 357
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Dan Nica, Edouard Martin, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Jeppe Kofod
S&D
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) promote access to, and take-up of, very high capacity data connectivity, both fixed and mobile, by all Union citizens and businesses;

(a) promote the availability and affordability of and access to, and take-up of, very high capacity data connectivity, both fixed and mobile, by all Union citizens and businesses;

Justification: Both availability and affordability are important for bridging digital divide.


Same as 356 - comment


Amendment 363 -

Amendment 363
Anne Sander, Françoise Grossetête
EPP
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) promote competition in the provision of electronic communications networks and associated facilities, including efficient infrastructure-based competition, and in the provision of electronic communications services and associated services;

(b) promote sustainable competition in the provision of electronic communications networks and associated facilities, including efficient infrastructure-based competition, and in the provision of electronic communications services and associated services;


This AM seeks to lower the effects of the promotion of competition.


Amendment 382 +

Amendment 382
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point f

(f) imposing ex ante regulatory obligations only to the extent necessary to secure effective and sustainable competition on the retail market concerned and relaxing or lifting such obligations as soon as that condition is fulfilled.

deleted


This paragraph limits the ex-ante regulatory obligations in


Amendment 392 +

Amendment 392
Morten Helveg Petersen
ALDE
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall cooperate with each other and with the Commission in the strategic planning, coordination and harmonisation of the use of radio spectrum in the Union. To this end, they shall take into consideration, inter alia, the economic, safety, health, public interest, public security and defence, freedom of expression, cultural, scientific, social and technical aspects of EU policies as well as the various interests of radio spectrum user communities with the aim of optimising the use of radio spectrum and avoiding harmful interference.

1. Member States shall cooperate with each other and with the Commission in the strategic planning, coordination and harmonisation of the use of radio spectrum in the Union. To this end, they shall take into consideration, inter alia, the economic, safety, health, public interest, public security and defence, data protection and privacy, freedom of expression, cultural, scientific, social and technical aspects of EU policies as well as the various interests of radio spectrum user communities with the aim of optimising the use of radio spectrum and avoiding harmful interference.


Includes data protection


Amendment 393 -

Amendment 393
Barbara Kappel, Angelo Ciocca, Lorenzo Fontana
ENF
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall cooperate with each other and with the Commission in the strategic planning, coordination and harmonisation of the use of radio spectrum in the Union. To this end, they shall take into consideration, inter alia, the economic, safety, health, public interest, public security and defence, freedom of expression, cultural, scientific, social and technical aspects of EU policies as well as the various interests of radio spectrum user communities with the aim of optimising the use of radio spectrum and avoiding harmful interference.

1. Member States shall cooperate with each other and with the Commission in the strategic planning, coordination and harmonisation of the use of radio spectrum, a scarce resource that belongs to the Member States. They might take into consideration, inter alia, the economic, safety, health, public interest, public security and defence, freedom of expression, cultural, scientific, social and technical aspects of EU policies as well as the various interests of radio spectrum user communities with the aim of optimising the use of radio spectrum and avoiding harmful interference.


We promotes the shared spectrum => emphasizing that spectrum belongs to the MS would diminish the scope and possibility to develop the shared spectrum.


Amendment 403 +

Amendment 403
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 8

- dealing with issues related to open internet access;

- ensuring compliance with rules related to open internet access;


Reinforce the importance of the open internet access rules


Amendment 404 +

Amendment 404
Eva Kaili
S&D
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 8

- dealing with issues related to open internet access;

- ensuring compliance with rules related to open internet access;


Same as 403 - Reinforce the importance of the open internet access rules


Amendment 415 ++

Amendment 415
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities apply Regulation 2015/2120 and BEREC Guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 5.3 of the abovementioned Regulation and coordinate within BEREC with other national regulatory authorities when implementing it.

Justification: The implementation of the regulation 2015/2120 is made on a national basis without any coordination of national regulation authorities, despite the BEREC guidelines.A harmonised implementation within the EU is of the utmost importance for predictability of law and for ensuring end-users rights.


The implementation of the regulation 2015/2120 is made on a national basis without any coordination of national regulation authorities, despite the BEREC guidelines. A harmonised implementation within the EU is of the utmost importance for predictability of law and for ensuring end-users rights.


Amendment 417 ++

Amendment 417
Morten Helveg Petersen
ALDE
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services, subject to the conditions set out in this Directive. To this end, Member States shall not prevent an undertaking from providing electronic communications networks or services, except where this is necessary for the reasons set out in Article 52 (1) of the Treaty. Any such limitation to the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services shall be duly reasoned and shall be notified to the Commission.

1. Member States shall ensure the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services, subject to the conditions set out in this Directive. To this end, Member States shall not prevent an undertaking from providing electronic communications networks or services, except where this is necessary for the reasons set out in Article 52 (1) of the Treaty. Any such limitation to the freedom to provide electronic communications networks and services shall be duly reasoned, provided for by law, respect the essence of the rights and freedoms recognised by the Charter and be subject to the principle of proportionality, in accordance with Article 52 (1) of the Charter and notified to the Commission.


Charter


Amendment 420 -

Amendment 420
Michał Boni, Françoise Grossetête, Anne Sander
EPP
Article 18 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that the rights, conditions and procedures concerning general authorisations and rights of use for radio spectrum or for numbers or rights to install facilities may only be amended in objectively justified cases and in a proportionate manner, taking into consideration, where appropriate, the specific conditions applicable to transferable rights of use for radio spectrum and for numbers.

1. Member States shall ensure that the rights, conditions and procedures concerning general authorisations and rights of use for radio spectrum or for numbers or rights to install facilities may only be amended in objectively justified cases and in a proportionate manner, taking into consideration, where appropriate, the specific conditions applicable to transferable rights of use for radio spectrum and for numbers. In the case of right of use for spectrum, the right holder shall have the right to object to any proposed amendment based on its existing and future spectrum usage plan and the need to safeguard investment.

Justification: Legal certainty as to spectrum usage rights is key to the promotion of investment in mobile networks and in particular in the next generation of mobile, 5G. It is proposed that operators be given the opportunity of objecting to spectrum rights changes on the basis of limited conditions such as future networks spectrum usage plans and the need to safeguard investment not yet fully depreciated.


This amendments does not enable the MS to make AM to a contract if needed.

Amendment 430 +

Amendment 430
José Blanco López, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz
S&D
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.

Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities, other competent authorities and BEREC have legal powers to request information, including financial information, from all relevant parties necessary to fulfilling their tasks and 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 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.

Justification: NRAs should have legal powers to request information to carry out their duties from any undertaking, whether or not it is defined as Electronic Communication Network/Service provider. This information is particularly relevant for market analyses


This AM reinforces the powers of NRAs to request information.


Amendment 565 ++

Amendment 565
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Dan Nica, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Jeppe Kofod, Martina Werner
S&D
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 prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.

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, when necessary for confidentiality, electronic communications content is 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.

Justification: Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the best way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents.


Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the best way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents.


Amendment 566 ++

Amendment 566
Eva Kaili
S&D
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 prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.

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, when necessary for confidentiality, electronic communications content is 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.


Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the best way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents.


Amendment 567 ++

Amendment 567
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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 prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.

1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services take appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure that electronic communications content are encrypted from end-to-end by default, in order 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 prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.

Justification: Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the only way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents. Any other measure would barely has any effect.Furthermore, such an obligation would be the mere implementation of Directive 2002/58/EC, article 5(1), which prohibits any “kinds of interception or surveillance of communications (...) by persons other than users, without the consent of the users concerned”.


Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the best way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents.


Amendment 568 ++

Amendment 568
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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 prevent and minimise the impact of security incidents on users and on other networks and services.

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.

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Encrypting communications content from end to end by default is the best way to effectively minimise the impact of security incidents.


Amendment 570 +

Amendment 570
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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.


Comment


Amendment 575 +

Amendment 575
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri
Article 40 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4 a (new)

Member States shall ensure that in case of a particular risk of a security incident in public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services providers of such networks or services shall inform their end-users of such a risk and of any possible protective measures or remedies which can be taken by the end-users.


Comment


Amendment 578 +

Amendment 578
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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.


Security & encryption

Amendment 601 +

Amendment 601
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Dan Nica, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Jeppe Kofod
S&D
Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e

(e) promoting the shared use of radio spectrum between similar and/or different uses of spectrum through appropriate established sharing rules and conditions, including the protection of existing rights of use, in accordance with Union law;

(e) promoting the shared use of radio spectrum between similar and/or different uses of spectrum; promoting competition through appropriate established sharing rules and conditions, including the protection of existing rights of use, in accordance with Union law;

Justification: Competition criteria in radio spectrum procedures are important when the procedures are designed. Fair and non-discriminatory wholesale access conditions and consumer choice should be enhanced.


Competition criteria in radio spectrum procedures are important when the procedures are designed. Fair and non-discriminatory wholesale access conditions and consumer choice should be enhanced.


Amendment 602 +

Amendment 602
David Borrelli, Dario Tamburrano
EFDD
Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e

(e) promoting the shared use of radio spectrum between similar and/or different uses of spectrum through appropriate established sharing rules and conditions, including the protection of existing rights of use, in accordance with Union law;

(e) promoting the shared use of radio spectrum between similar and/or different uses of spectrum promoting competition through appropriate established sharing rules and conditions, including the protection of existing rights of use, in accordance with Union law;

Justification: The amendment aims to promote competition in radio spectrum assignment procedures.


Same as AM 601 - The amendment aims to promote competition in radio spectrum assignment procedures.


Amendment 603 ++

Amendment 603
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)

(e a) The Commission shall establish a programme aiming to release spectrum for shared and unlicensed uses. This programme shall include the development of a European database of shared and unlicensed spectrum.

Justification: Innovation and freedom of expression need a broad access to shared and unlicensed uses of , as stressed in article 6 of the 2012 Radio Spectrum Policy Programme. Increasing this access is thus a major challenge. Following the success of the release of the 1,2 Ghz frequencies within the Radio spectrum policy programme (Article 3 of Decision 243/2012/EU), the European Commission shall launch such a programme aiming at the release of shared spectrum. A database of shared spectrum would greatly facilitate and encourage the release of shared spectrum.


Innovation and freedom of expression need a broad access to shared and unlicensed uses of , as stressed in article 6 of the 2012 Radio Spectrum Policy Programme. Increasing this access is thus a major challenge. Following the success of the release of the 1,2 Ghz frequencies within the Radio spectrum policy programme (Article 3 of Decision 243/2012/EU), the European Commission shall launch such a programme aiming at the release of shared spectrum. A database of shared spectrum would greatly facilitate and encourage the release of shared spectrum.


Amendment 636 -

Amendment 636
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part

When applying a general authorisation or individual rights taking in account measures adopted under Decision No 676/2002/EC where the radio spectrum band 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 general authorisation and individual rights of use. In so doing, they shall have regard to the need:

2. Where appropriate, Member States shall consider the possibility to authorise the use of radio spectrum based on a combination of general authorisation and individual rights of use. They shall in particular consider the possibility of the gradual transfer from general authorisation to individual rights of use where necessary to foster innovation and facilitate market entry of smaller market participants. They shall favour technological solutions for the management of potential harmful interference with a view to choose the least restrictive authorisation regime possible.

Justification: There is a need to simplify the procedure as proposed. In addition, in accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


comment


Amendment 645 -

Amendment 645
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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.


comment


Amendment 665 +

Amendment 665
András Gyürk
EPP
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 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.

deleted


Remove the duration of 25 years licencing


Amendment 670 +

Amendment 670
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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 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.

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 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.

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Maximum 25 years with a review every 5 years


Amendment 674 ++

Amendment 674
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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 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.

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 25 years, reviewed at regular intervals of maximum 5 years for assessing and amending the rights according to laydown procedures.

Justification: The draft Code proposes to extend to a minimum of 25 years the duration of rights to use the radio spectrum. This is disproportionate and unnecessary. Experience shows us that 20 years is already too long, especially considering that the regulation does not enable regulators to act when necessary, e.g. by withdrawing authorisation, even if the operator fails to honor its commitments. Allocating spectrum for more than 5 years would necessitate adding a revision clause/sunset date regularly, with sanctions if the operator fails its obligations. The maximum length of allocation shall be 25 years, with such scheduled sunset dates.The "use it or lose it" clause proposed in the Code is insufficient to enable NRAs to withdraw authorisation if necessary. The capacities of the NRAs should thus be enhanced and more detailed in order to control the use of the licences, preventing holders from "parking" frequencies for too long, thereby hindering connectivity and innovation.


Experience shows us that 20 years is already too long, especially considering that the regulation does not enable regulators to act when necessary, e.g. by withdrawing authorisation, even if the operator fails to honor its commitments. Allocating spectrum for more than 5 years would necessitate adding a revision clause/sunset date regularly, with sanctions if the operator fails its obligations. The maximum length of allocation shall be 25 years, with such scheduled sunset dates.


Amendment 702 ++

Amendment 702
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Where that provision is not commercial in character or is ancillary to another commercial activity or public service which is not dependent on the conveyance of signals on those networks, any undertaking, public authority or end-user providing such access shall not be subject to any general authorisation for the provision of electronic communications networks or services pursuant to Article 12, to obligations regarding end-users rights pursuant to Title III of Part III of this Directive nor to obligations to interconnect their networks pursuant to Article 59 (1).

Where that provision is not commercial in character or is ancillary to another commercial activity or public service which is not dependent on the conveyance of signals on those networks, any undertaking, public authority or user providing such access shall not be subject to any general authorisation for the provision of electronic communications networks or services pursuant to Article 12, to obligations regarding users rights pursuant to Title III of Part III of this Directive nor to obligations to interconnect their networks pursuant to Article 59 (1). Individuals providing such access not-for-profit shall not be liable for information transmitted by third parties over such access.

Justification: The Proposal intends to foster the development of radio local area networks, especially where they provide services which are not commercial in character. The development of such networks mainly depends on the personal participation of individual volunteers, who expend the networks by managing their own relays and access points. However, such a participation is hindered by several laws which seek to prevent the sharing of Internet connections amongst several users by making people responsible (and potentially liable) for all communication made through their Wi-Fi connection, and create legal risks for people sharing their connection.In Germany, rights-holders have used a "secondary liability" doctrine to chill the growth of the community networks movement. In France too, copyright law imposes a secondary liability regime that creates significant legal uncertainty for people sharing their network connections with other users. The so-called "mere conduit", inscribed in EU law since 2000 in the directive on information society services, needs to be clearly guaranteed and expanded to small-area wireless access points.In the same spirit, contract clauses that forbid subscribers to share their connections with others should be prohibited in any case: the possibility to share their connections should not be limited to specific offers.Promoting a right to share Internet connections is all the more vital considering the economic and ecological crises, as well as the rapid increase of populations that cannot afford access to the Internet. In this context, connection sharing can play a critical role in fostering a more equitable and sustainable use of telecommunications infrastructure.


This AM aims to avoid legal risks for people sharing their connection


Amendment 703 ++

Amendment 703
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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.

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.

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


This AM aims to avoid legal risks for people sharing their connection


Amendment 706 ++

Amendment 706
José Blanco López, Sergio Gutiérrez Prieto, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz
S&D
Article 55 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. End-users allowing access to their internet access service as set out in paragraph 2 shall not be liable for any use that other end-users might do while connected to their network.

Justification: Sharing of consumers' private Wi-Fi networks may bring benefits to consumers as they can use additional access points. However, it is imperative that such additional networks are only installed on consumers' private equipment with their explicit consent and that the consumer whose internet access service is being shared is under no circumstance responsible nor liable for any use that other person might do while connected to his Wi-Fi network.


This AM aims to avoid legal risks for people sharing their connection


Amendment 708 --

Amendment 708
Evžen Tošenovský
ECR
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a

a) the right of end-users to accede to radio local area networks of their choice provided by third parties;

deleted


This AM remove the right of users to accede to radio local area networks of their choice!


Amendment 710 --

Amendment 710
Evžen Tošenovský
ECR
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b

b) the right of end-users to allow reciprocally or more generally access to the networks of such providers by other end-users through radio local area networks, including on the basis of third-party initiatives which aggregate and make publicly accessible the radio local area networks of different end-users.

deleted


This AM remove the right of users to accede to radio local area networks of their choice!


Amendment 712 +

Amendment 712
Evžen Tošenovský
ECR
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

To that end, providers of public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services shall make available and actively offer, clearly and transparently, products or specific offers allowing its end-users to provide access to third parties through a radio local area network.

deleted


Contract clauses that forbid subscribers to share their connections with others should be prohibited in any case: the possibility to share their connections should not be limited to specific offers.


Amendment 713 +

Amendment 713
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 55 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

To that end, providers of public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services shall make available and actively offer, clearly and transparently, products or specific offers allowing its end-users to provide access to third parties through a radio local area network.

deleted

Justification: Contract clauses that forbid subscribers to share their connections with others should be prohibited in any case: the possibility to share their connections should not be limited to specific offers.


Contract clauses that forbid subscribers to share their connections with others should be prohibited in any case: the possibility to share their connections should not be limited to specific offers.


Amendment 717 +

Amendment 717
Pervenche Berès, Edouard Martin
S&D
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Pour réaliser les objectifs exposés à l’article 3, les autorités de régulation nationales encouragent et, le cas échéant, assurent, conformément aux dispositions de la présente directive, un accès et une interconnexion adéquats, ainsi que l’interopérabilité des services et elles s’acquittent de leur tâche de façon à promouvoir l’efficacité économique, à favoriser une concurrence durable et le déploiement de réseaux à très haute capacité, à encourager des investissements efficients et l’innovation et à procurer un avantage maximal à l’utilisateur final. Elles fournissent des orientations et rendent publiques les procédures applicables pour l’obtention de l’accès et de l’interconnexion, afin que les petites et moyennes entreprises et les opérateurs actifs dans une zone géographique limitée puissent bénéficier des obligations imposées.

Pour réaliser les objectifs exposés à l’article 3, les autorités de régulation nationales encouragent et, le cas échéant, assurent, conformément aux dispositions de la présente directive, un accès et une interconnexion adéquats, ainsi que l’interopérabilité des services et elles s’acquittent de leur tâche de façon à promouvoir l’efficacité économique, à favoriser une concurrence durable, le pluralisme des médias, la diversité culturelle, le déploiement de réseaux à très haute capacité, à encourager des investissements efficients et l’innovation et à procurer un avantage maximal à l’utilisateur final. Elles fournissent des orientations et rendent publiques les procédures applicables pour l’obtention de l’accès et de l’interconnexion, afin que les petites et moyennes entreprises et les opérateurs actifs dans une zone géographique limitée puissent bénéficier des obligations imposées.


Pluralisme des médias


Amendment 722 /

Amendment 722
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c

(c) in justified cases, obligations on providers of number-independent interpersonal communications services to make their services interoperable, namely where access to emergency services or end-to-end connectivity between end-users is endangered due to a lack of interoperability between interpersonal communications services.

deleted


to be checked


Amendment 731 ++

Amendment 731
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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; and

(i) to the extent necessary to ensure interoperability of interpersonal communications services and may include an obligation to publish and authorize the use, modification and redistribution of any relevant information or an obligation to use or implement of standards or specifications listed in Article 39(1) or of any other relevant European or international standards; and

Justification: Ensuring interoperability of interpersonal communications services requires that the technical information necessary to communicate with the users of such services can be freely accessed, used, modified and redistributed by anyone, whether this information is already public or held by the providers of these services. Encryption should not be jeopardized by such standards.


Ensuring interoperability of interpersonal communications services requires that the technical information necessary to communicate with the users of such services can be freely accessed, used, modified and redistributed by anyone, whether this information is already public or held by the providers of these services. Encryption should not be jeopardized by such standards.


Amendment 732 +

Amendment 732
Kaja Kallas, Marietje Schaake
ALDE
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; and

(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; such obligations shall not lead to the weakening of security standards of these services.

Justification: In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Security


Amendment 734 -

Amendment 734
Angelika Niebler, Herbert Reul, Markus Pieper
EPP
Article 59 – paragraph 2

(2) Die nationalen Regulierungsbehörden legen auf angemessenen Antrag auf Zugang zu Verkabelungen in Gebäuden oder bis zum ersten Konzentrations- oder Verteilungspunkt, sofern dieser außerhalb des Gebäudes liegt, den Eigentümern solcher Verkabelungen oder Unternehmen, die zu deren Nutzung berechtigt sind, Verpflichtungen auf, wenn dies dadurch gerechtfertigt ist, dass eine Replizierung dieser Netzbestandteile wirtschaftlich ineffizient oder praktisch unmöglich wäre. Die auferlegten Zugangsbedingungen können konkrete Bestimmungen bezüglich Zugang, Transparenz und Nichtdiskriminierung sowie der Umlegung der Kosten des Zugangs enthalten, die zur Berücksichtigung von Risikofaktoren gegebenenfalls angepasst werden.

entfällt

Die nationalen Regulierungsbehörden können diesen Eigentümern oder Unternehmen zu fairen und angemessenen Bedingungen auch Verpflichtungen zur Zugangsgewährung auferlegen, die sich über den ersten Konzentrations- oder Verteilungspunkt hinaus bis zu einem möglichst nahe an den Endnutzern gelegenen Konzentrationspunkt erstrecken, soweit dies unbedingt notwendig ist, um unüberwindbare wirtschaftliche oder natürliche Hindernisse für eine Replizierung in weniger dicht besiedelten Gebieten zu umgehen.

Die nationalen Regulierungsbehörden erlegen die in Unterabsatz 2 genannten Verpflichtungen nicht auf, wenn

a) einem Unternehmen ein tragfähiger und vergleichbarer alternativer Zugangsweg zu den Endnutzern zur Verfügung gestellt wird, sofern der Zugang zu fairen und angemessenen Bedingungen zu einem Netz mit sehr hoher Kapazität von einem Unternehmen gewährt wird, das die Kriterien in Artikel 77 Absatz 1 Buchstaben a und b erfüllt;

b) bei neuen Netzbestandteilen, die insbesondere im Rahmen kleinerer lokaler Projekte errichtet wurden, die Gewährung des Zugangs die wirtschaftliche oder finanzielle Tragfähigkeit der Errichtung gefährden würde.

Justification: Die EU-Kostenreduzierungsrichtlinie 2014/61/EU beinhaltet zusätzliche Elemente einer symmetrischen Regulierung. Die Europäische Kommission legt dem Europäischen Parlament und dem Rat spätestens am 1. Juli 2018 einen Bericht über die Umsetzung dieser Richtlinie vor. Es sollten zunächst die Ergebnisse des Umsetzungsberichtes abgewartet werden, um auf dieser Grundlage entscheiden zu können, ob zusätzliche Elemente einer symmetrischen Regulierung notwendig sind.


Comment


Amendment 735 -

Amendment 735
Kaja Kallas
ALDE
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

Where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or technically impossible and the access to such elements is necessary to foster sustainable competition, national regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request, to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, including where necessary to the required associated facilities, on transparency, non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.Such obligations shall only be imposed following a market analysis procedure in accordance with article 65 and shall complement but not replace regulatory measures taken in accordance with article 66 to ensure the effectiveness of the actions of national regulatory authorities to comply with the objectives set out in article 3 of this Directive.

Justification: Symmetric obligations being imposed on all undertaking without regard to their market power shall only be imposed where justified and necessary given their potential negative impact on investment and competition. They should therefore be linked to a market analysis procedure to prevent that they achieve the opposite goals that the obligations taken by regulators under the SMP regime seek to achieve. In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


Limits regulation possibilities


Amendment 737 +

Amendment 737
Eva Kaili
S&D
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

Without prejudice to 59(1), national regulatory authorities shall, taking full account of the principle of proportionality impose obligations to meet reasonable requests to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside but close to the building, or beyond it to a concentration point close to end-users, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings on providers of electronic communications networks or electronic communications services that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed shall be objective, transparent, non-discriminatory and proportionate in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3(3), and may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access. These measures should be consistent with the provisions of [Broadband Cost reductions Directive]


reinforce access


Amendment 738 +

Amendment 738
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

In particular, and without prejudice to the generalities of 59(1), national regulatory authorities may impose obligations to meet reasonable requests for access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building or beyond it to a concentration point close to end-users on providers of electronic communications networks or electronic communications services that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency, non-discrimination and the price of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.When imposing access regulation beyond the first concentration or distribution point, national regulatory authorities may under special circumstances impose active or virtual access to such wiring and cables.


comment


Amendment 739 +

Amendment 739
Lieve Wierinck, Hilde Vautmans
ALDE
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

National regulatory authorities may impose obligations to meet reasonable requests for access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, or beyond it to a concentration point close to end-users, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. These access conditions should be imposed on fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors. When imposing access regulation beyond the first concentration or distribution point, national regulatory authorities may, under special circumstances, impose active or virtual access to such wiring and cables.


comment


Amendment 740 +

Amendment 740
Kathleen Van Brempt
S&D
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

National regulatory authorities may impose obligations to address reasonable requests for access to wiring and cables inside buildings, up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, or beyond that point at a concentration point in proximity of the end-user, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors. National regulatory authorities may, when circumstances require it, impose active or virtual access to wiring and cables, in the event of imposing access regulation beyond the first concentration or distribution point.


comment


Amendment 741 +

Amendment 741
Gunnar Hökmark, Henna Virkkunen, Bendt Bendtsen
EPP
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations to meet reasonable requests for access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to a concentration or distribution point as close to end-users as possible, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors. Under special circumstances, when access regulation is imposed beyond the first concentration or distribution point, national regulatory authorities may impose active or virtual access to such wiring and cables.


comment


Amendment 742 +

Amendment 742
Olle Ludvigsson
S&D
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations upon reasonable request to grant access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to the first concentration or distribution point where that point is located outside the building, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency and non-discrimination and for apportioning the costs of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.

National regulatory authorities shall impose obligations to meet reasonable requests for access to wiring and cables inside buildings or up to a concentration or distribution point as close as possible to end-users, on the owners of such wiring and cable or on undertakings that have the right to use such wiring and cables, where this is justified on the grounds that replication of such network elements would be economically inefficient or physically impracticable. The access conditions imposed may include specific rules on access, transparency, non-discrimination and the price of access, which, where appropriate, are adjusted to take into account risk factors.When imposing access regulation beyond the first concentration or distribution point, national regulatory authorities may under special circumstances impose active or virtual access to such wiring and cables.


comment

Amendment 753 +

Amendment 753
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Dan Nica, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Jeppe Kofod, Flavio Zanonato
S&D
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

National regulatory authorities may extend to those owners or undertakings the imposition of such access obligations, on fair and reasonable terms and conditions, beyond the first concentration or distribution point to a concentration point as close as possible to end-users, to the extent strictly necessary to address insurmountable economic or physical barriers to replication in areas with lower population density.

When imposing access regulation beyond the first concentration or distribution point, national regulatory authorities may under special circumstances impose active or virtual access to such wiring and cables beyond the first concentration or distribution point to a concentration point as close as possible to end-users, to the extent strictly necessary to address insurmountable economic or physical barriers to replication in areas with lower population density.

Justification: National regulatory authorities should have ability to impose regulation as close as possible to end-users if necessary to address economic or physical barriers, especially in areas with low population density.


National regulatory authorities should have ability to impose regulation as close as possible to end-users if necessary to address economic or physical barriers, especially in areas with low population density.


Amendment 757 ++

Amendment 757
José Blanco López, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3

National regulatory authorities shall not impose obligations in accordance with the second subparagraph where:

deleted

(a) a viable and similar alternative means of access to end-users is made available to any undertaking, provided that the access is offered on 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

(b) in the case of recently deployed network elements, in particular by smaller local projects, the granting of that access would compromise the economic or financial viability of their deployment.


Remove limitations to regulation


Amendment 790 -

Amendment 790
Evžen Tošenovský
ECR
Article 59 – paragraph 6

6. By [entry into force plus 18 months in order to contribute to a consistent definition of the location of network termination points by national regulatory authorities, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, adopt guidelines on common approaches to the identification of the network termination point in different network topologies. National regulatory authorities shall take utmost account of those guidelines when defining the location of network termination points.

deleted


A common approach within the EU would ensure a predictability for all EU users.


Amendment 792 ++

Amendment 792
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

An undertaking shall be deemed to have significant market power if, either individually or jointly with others, it enjoys a position equivalent to dominance, that is to say a position of economic strength affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of competitors, customers and ultimately consumers.

An undertaking shall be deemed to have significant market power if, either individually or jointly with others, including through a commercial or a co-investment agreement, it enjoys a position equivalent to dominance, that is to say a position of economic strength affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of competitors, customers and ultimately consumers.

Justification: Co-investment in a certain area must be considered an oligopoly of a few powerful actors (on the local level), as the FDN Federation showed in their analysis of the fixed-line market (www.ffdn.org/en/node/129 ) written for a consultation of the ARCEP in 2016. These oligopolies work as a cartel. The co-investors, in a given area, should be regarded as having the position of the incumbent in that area. Such symmetric regulation would allow welcoming all actors into the market.


Co-investment in a certain area must be considered an oligopoly of a few powerful actors (on the local level), as the FDN Federation showed in their analysis of the fixed-line market (www.ffdn.org/en/node/129 ) written for a consultation of the ARCEP in 2016. These oligopolies work as a cartel. The co-investors, in a given area, should be regarded as having the position of the incumbent in that area. Such symmetric regulation would allow welcoming all actors into the market.


Amendment 793 +

Amendment 793
Kathleen Van Brempt
S&D
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

An undertaking shall be deemed to have significant market power if, either individually or jointly with others, it enjoys a position equivalent to dominance, that is to say a position of economic strength affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of competitors, customers and ultimately consumers.

An undertaking shall be deemed to have significant market power if, either individually or jointly with others, it enjoys a position equivalent to dominance, that is to say a position of economic strength affording it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of competitors, customers and ultimately consumers or when it is able to disrupt effective competition.


on definition of SMP


Amendment 794 +

Amendment 794
Kaja Kallas
ALDE
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.

Justification: In light of the increasing trend of convergence between markets, and development of oligopolies in Europe, there is a need to include situations where two or more undertakings can foreclose the markets even without tacit collusion.In accordance with rule 104 of the rules of procedure, this amendment is necessary for pressing reasons related to the internal logic of the text


In light of the increasing trend of convergence between markets, and development of oligopolies in Europe, there is a need to include situations where two or more undertakings can foreclose the markets even without tacit collusion.


Amendment 800 +

Amendment 800
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Edouard Martin, Flavio Zanonato, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Dan Nica, Jeppe Kofod
S&D
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 b (new)

An undertaking shall be deemed to have unilateral market power where, in the absence of significant market power, it enjoys a position of economic strength by virtue of the weakness of competitive constraints in an oligopolistic market, enabling it to act in a manner which is detrimental to consumer welfare.

Justification: Defining unilateral market power can bring tools for NRAs to ensure competition in markets. Oligopolies have become increasingly commonplace in the EU.


on definition of SMP


Amendment 818 +

Amendment 818
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
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;

deleted

Justification: The Commission’s proposal weakens the SMP regime. The way in which the 3-criteria test is described in the draft Code differs from the version of the test that has been applied, successfully, by NRAs over the last 15 years and which is set out in Recommendation 2014/710/EU. Article 65 (2) (a) as proposed by the Commission adds a purely speculative element into the market analysis framework. According to BEREC opinion BoR (16) 213 (p.10): “In particular, in order to determine whether a market can be considered for regulation, the new test requires NRAs to take account of market developments which “may increase the likelihood” of a relevant market tending towards effective competition, ultimately making it difficult for NRAs to find that a market can be assessed for SMP.” Constraints on NRAs’ ability to impose regulations have to be avoided. The focus on commercial agreements undermines the SMP regime, as it is linked to a deregulatory promise and might in the long run create cartel-like oligopolies that cannot easily be treated with anti-trust law. The proposal also neglects the connection between cause and effect. Sufficient competition on the retail market results from functioning wholesale markets and should hence by no means be taken as a criterion to deregulate wholesale access. Effective access regulation to the SMP operator’s network is crucial to maintain sustainable retail competition, which in turn leads to lower prices and more choice for consumers.


The Commission’s proposal weakens the SMP regime.


Amendment 831 +

Amendment 831
Michel Reimon
Verts/ALE
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) all relevant competitive constraints, including at retail level, irrespective of whether the sources of such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of services or applications which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user, and irrespective of whether such constraints are part of the relevant market;

(b) all relevant competitive constraints, especially at wholesale level, irrespective of whether the sources of such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of services or applications which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user;


comment


Amendment 832 +

Amendment 832
Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Zigmantas Balčytis, Victor Negrescu, Carlos Zorrinho, Dan Nica, Jeppe Kofod, Flavio Zanonato
S&D
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) all relevant competitive constraints, including at retail level, irrespective of whether the sources of such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of services or applications which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user, and irrespective of whether such constraints are part of the relevant market;

(b) all relevant competitive constraints, on wholesale and retail level level, irrespective of whether the sources of such constraints are deemed to be electronic communications networks, electronic communications services, or other types of services or applications which are comparable from the perspective of the end-user;

Justification: Avoiding the possibility to deregulate on the sole basis of the existence of commercial access agreements is necessary. Putting the focus on commercial agreements for deregulating would weaken and undermine the SMP regime already in place. At the same time, we should avoid the focus on only retail market, as narrowing the scope of competition to the retail level introduces great uncertainty as regards one of the cornerstones of the regulatory framework. Effective access wholesale regulation to the SMP operator’s network is pivotal to establish and maintain an intensive and sustainable retail competition. Sufficient competition on the retail market results from functioning wholesale markets and should hence by no means be taken as a criterion to deregulate wholesale access. Consequently the mere prospect of removing access regulation undermines investments of alternative network operators, which are sensitive to expectations on the (un)reliability of wholesale access products. Therefore, deregulation subject to weak safeguards has to be prevented.


comment