1. Spielmann Max 6th of June 2014
3rd Luxembourg Workshop on Space and Satellite Communications Law
Proposal for the EU Regulation “Connected Continent” and its Implications
Spielmann Max
6th of June 2014

2. Introduction & Outline
Commission argues:
Most ambitious plan in 26 years of telecoms market reform
Will allow the creation of a Single Market
Brings distinct solution, but they are all vital
Structure of the proposal:
1. Removal of unnecessary obstacles:
Single authorisation
Virtual access obligations
Spectrum coordination
2. Consumer protection:
General principles
Net neutrality
Roaming
3. BEREC reform

3. I. The removal of unnecessary obstacles
A. Single EU authorisation
‘One-stop-shop’ + Single authorisation
Condition = Notification in home MS (all languages)
Despite one-stop-shop’:
‘Host NRA’ = In principle competent
‘Home NRA’ = Competent for Suspension/Withdrawal
But: Extension of Commission’s powers
B. European virtual access products
Introduction of these product in the European legal order
Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in order to adapt to technological developments

4. C. Coordination of use of spectrum
Art. 12: Commission = implementing acts:
Establish common timetables for the whole Union
Determine minimum durations for rights of use
Determine synchronised expiry or renewal dates
Implementing acts for all these requirements
Art. 16: The Commission may adopt implementing acts to ensure/resolve:
Coordinated outcomes + equitable access to spectrum
Any practical inconsistencies
The enforcement of coordinated solutions
Commission: Proposal will have positive effects for cross border activities/Economy of scale/Efficient use
Criticisms: Commission would become de facto competent/has already extensive powers

5. III. Consumer protection principles
II. BEREC reform
Commission wants to become competent to propose a list of candidates/ to propose withdrawal of Chairpersons
Advantages (COM): Allow BEREC to play a more strategic role + more organisational stability
Criticisms: Loss of independence + Not necessary
III. Consumer protection principles
A. General consumer protection rules
Changes are mostly related to the choice of the legal instrument
Main advantage: Promotion of cross border activities
Main criticisms: Loss of MS possibility to act / Reduction of some national consumer protection standards

6. B. Net neutrality Currently no harmonised framework
Commission proposal:
Principle: everyone has the right to access and to distribute content via its internet service access
Exceptions:
Data-volumes/Speeds may contractually be limited
Specialised Services/IPS may agree with each other, or with content providers
Traffic management measures
Parliament = Insists on the principle of net neutrality
 Amended proposal = Step in the right direction

7. C. Roaming charges Commission wants to allow ‘roaming alliances’
 Conditions (but exceptions):
Roaming services at domestic charges
Coverage of all MS
Roaming alliances may rely on ‘reasonable use’ criterion
Main criticisms:
Current framework only entered into force in 2012 / Not even developed its full effects
Only favour large operators
‘Reasonable use’ criterion = negative

8. Concluding remarks
Commission’s ultimate intent (promote best economical growth) = in principle valid objective
But – Commission:
Unjustified intent to be endowed by further competences
Favours large operators at the expense of consumer protection standards
Consequently: Most provisions ≠ ready to be adopted

9. Thank you for your attention Questions?