Translations:Paquet Telecom 2017/forces/9/en

Their positions in several points:

• Physical access ECTA reminds that although the supply of "active" access has been decisive for many actors, it can not substitute for "passive" access and asks for the code to be clearer on this subject.
• Review of the concept of competition' ': in the current version of the code, two players are sufficient to establish satisfactory competition. ECTA does not, of course, agree with this proposal.
• Significant Market Power : ECTA demands an equal approach when making regulatory decisions in order not to support incumbent or monopolistic actors against alternative actors.
• Deregulation and co-investment agreement: ECTA reminds that the risk of deregulation of the fibre market (and particularly FTTH) coupled with the dominant position of the incumbents in this market would lead to the exclusion of "smaller players in the market, particularly in the context of a co-investment agreement".
• Retail market: The retail market must be regulated a priori as well as the wholesale market in order to avoid the abuse of a dominant position and not to wait for regulation Posteriori.
• Spectrum: The spectrum must be available to all and not only be distributed to major players.
• 'Simplification of the universal service of electronic communications' : The provisions present in the code are supported by ECTA.
• Transnational market: ECTA emphasizes the lack of initiative in competitive positions in commercial offers (B2B) and the present provisions would retain the concentration of markets.

Operators who have the infrastructure sell two types of access to other operators or service providers: 'passive' access where a line is provided but the operator or the service provider must install hardware on the last section and an "active" access where the bandwidth is leased and there is no need to install hardware.