Contact: Suzanne.Vanderzande@ec.europa.eu
Consultation on Directive 2010/13/EU on audiovisual media services (AVMSD)
A media framework for the 21st century
Fields marked with * are mandatory.
Consultationion on Directive 2010/13/EU on audiovisual media services (AVMSD)
A media framework for the 21st century
Description
The Commission is consulting on the Directive 2010/13/EU on Audiovisual Media Services (AVMSD) first to check which parts of the Directive are currently fit for purpose as part of the Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT), and, second, to collect evidence and views on the future media services policy in the form of an impact assessment.
Targeted respondents
National regulators, broadcasters, producers, content providers telecom service providers, civil society organisations, academia and citizens
Duration
6 July 2015 - 30 September 2015
Comments received after the closing date will not be considered.
General information on respondents
* I am responding as:
An individual in my personal capacity
The representative of an organisation/company/institution
*
What is your nationality?
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Ireland
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
Other
* What is your name?
* Please indicate your email (this will not be published)
Received contributions, together with the identity of the contributor, will be published on the Internet, unless the contributor objects to publication of the personal data on the grounds that such publication would harm his or her legitimate interests. In this case the contribution may be published in anonymous form. Otherwise the contribution will not be published nor will, in principle, its content be taken into account. Any objections in this regard should be sent to the service responsible for the consultation.
Please read the Specific Privacy Statement on how we deal with your personal data and contribution
* Do you agree to your contribution being published on the Commission’s website?
Yes, I agree to my response being published under the name I indicate (name of your organisation/company/public authority or your name if your reply as an individual)
No, I do not want my response to be published
Background and objectives
The Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD[1]) has paved the way towards a single European market for audiovisual media services. It has harmonised the audiovisual rules of the Member States and facilitated the provision of audiovisual media services across the EU on the basis of the country of origin principle. Since its adoption in 2007, the audiovisual media landscape has changed significantly due to media convergence[2]. The review of the AVMSD is featured in the Commission Work Programme for 2015, as part of the Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT). In its Communication on a Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe[3], the Commission announced that the AVMSD would be revised in 2016. Another REFIT exercise is being carried out, in parallel, in the field of telecoms with a view to come forward with proposals in 2016. Some of the issues treated in the current public consultation may have an impact on this parallel exercise and vice versa. In 2013, the Commission adopted a Green Paper "Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values"[4] inviting stakeholders to share their views on the changing media landscape and its implications for the AVMSD. On the basis of the outcome of this public consultation, the Commission has identified the following issues to be considered in the evaluation and review of the AVMSD:
1.Ensuring a level playing field for audiovisual media services;
2.Providing for an optimal level of consumer protection;
3.User protection and prohibition of hate speech and discrimination;
4.Promoting European audiovisual content;
5.Strengthening the single market;
6.Strengthening media freedom and pluralism, access to information and accessibility to content for people with disabilities.
You are asked to answer a number of questions revolving around these issues. Please reason your answers and possibly illustrate them with concrete examples and substantiate them with data. The policy options identified are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but may sometimes be combined. Please indicate your preferred policy options, if any, and feel free to provide any other comment that you deem useful.
Questions
1. Ensuring a level playing field
Services to which the AVMSD applies
The AVMSD regulates television broadcasts and on-demand services. It applies to programmes that are TV-like[5] and for which providers have editorial responsibility[6]. The AVMSD does not apply to content hosted by online video-sharing platforms and intermediaries.
These platforms and intermediaries are regulated primarily by the e-Commerce Directive[3], which exempts them from liability for the content they transmit, store or host, under certain conditions.
As a separate exercise, given the increasingly central role that online platforms and intermediaries (e.g. search engines, social media, e-commerce platforms, app stores, price comparison websites) play in the economy and society, the Commission Communication "A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe" announces a comprehensive assessment of the role of platforms and of online intermediaries to be launched at the end of 2015.
Set of questions 1.1
Are the provisions on the services to which the Directive applies (television broadcasting and on-demand services) still relevant[8], effective[9] and fair[10]?
Relevant
Yes
No
No opinion
Effective
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Are you aware of issues (e.g. related to consumer protection or competitive disadvantage) due to the fact that certain audiovisual services are not regulated by the AVMSD?
Yes (if yes, please explain below)
No
Preferred policy option:
a) Maintaining the status quo
b) Issuing European Commission's guidance clarifying the scope of the AVMSD. No other changes to Union law would be foreseen.
c) Amending law(s) other than the AVMSD, notably the e-Commerce Directive. This option could be complemented by self and co-regulatory initiatives.
d) Amending the AVMSD, namely by extending all or some of its provisions for instance to providers offering audiovisual content which does not qualify as "TV-like" or to providers hosting user-generated content.
e) Other option (please describe)
Please explain your choice:
Geographical scope of AVMSD
The AVMSD applies to operators established in the EU. Operators established outside the EU but targeting EU audiences with their audiovisual media services (via, for instance, terrestrial broadcasting satellite broadcasting the Internet or other means) do not fall under the scope of the Directive[11].b>
Set of questions 1.2
Are the provisions on the geographical scope of the Directive still relevant, effective and fair?
Relevant?
Yes
No
No opinion
Effective
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Are you aware of issues (e.g. related to consumer protection problems or competitive disadvantage) caused by the current geographical scope of application of the AVMSD?
Yes (if yes, please explain)
No
Comments:
Preferred policy option:
a) Maintaining the status quo
b) Extending the scope of application of the Directive to providers of audiovisual media services established outside the EU that are targeting EU audiences. This could be done, for example, by requiring these providers to register or designate a representative in one Member State (for instance, the main target country). The rules of the Member State of registration or representation would apply.
c) Extending the scope of application of the Directive to audiovisual media services established outside the EU that are targeting EU audiences and whose presence in the EU is significant in terms of market share/turnover. As for option b), this could be done, for example, by requiring these providers to register or designate a representative in one Member State (for instance, the main target country). The rules of the Member State of registration or representation would apply.
d) Other option (please describe)
Please explain your choice:
2. Providing for an optimal level of consumer protection
The AVMSD is based on a so-called "graduated regulatory approach". The AVMSD acknowledges that a core set of societal values should apply to all audiovisual media services, but sets out lighter regulatory requirements for on-demand services as compared to linear services. The reason is that for on-demand services the users have a more active, "lean-forward" approach and can decide on the content and the time of viewing.
In the area of commercial communications [12] , the AVMSD sets out certain rules, which apply to all audiovisual media services and regulate, for example, the use of sponsorship and product placement. They also set limits to commercial communications for alcohol and tobacco.
It also lays down other rules that apply only to television broadcasting services and regulate advertising from a quantitative point of view. For example, they set a maximum of 12 minutes of advertising per hour on television, define how often TV films, cinematographic works and news programmes can be interrupted by advertisements and set the minimum duration of teleshopping windows.
Set of questions 2.1
Are the current rules on commercial communications still relevant, effective and fair?
Relevant?
Yes
No
No opinion
Effective
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Are you aware of issues (e.g. related to consumer protection or competitive disadvantage) caused by the AVMSD's rules governing commercial communications?
Yes (if yes, please explain)
No
Preferred policy option:
a) Maintaining the status quo
b) Rendering the rules on commercial communications more flexible, notably those setting quantitative limits on advertising and on the number of interruptions.
c) Tightening certain rules on advertising that aim to protect vulnerable viewers, notably the rules on alcohol advertising or advertising of products high in fat, salt and sugars.
d) Other options (please describe)
Please explain your choice:
3. User protection and prohibition of hate speech and discrimination
General viewers' protection under the AVMSD
The AVMSD lays down a number of rules aimed at protecting viewers/users, minors, people with disabilities, prohibiting hate speech and discrimination.
Set of questions 3.1
Is the overall level of protection afforded by the AVMSD still relevant, effective and fair?
Relevant?
Yes
No
No opinion
Effective?
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Are you aware of issues (e.g. related to consumer protection or competitive disadvantage) stemming from the AVMSD's rules?
Yes (please explain)
No
Comments:
Protection of minors
The system of graduated regulation applies also to the protection of minors: the less control a viewer has and the more harmful specific content is, the more restrictions apply. For television broadcasting services, programmes that “might seriously impair” the development of minors are prohibited (i.e., pornography or gratuitous violence), while those programmes which might simply be "harmful" to minors can only be transmitted when it is ensured that minors will not normally hear or see them. For on-demand services, programmes that "might seriously impair" the development of minors are allowed in on-demand services, but they may only be made available in such a way that minors will not normally hear or see them. There are no restrictions for programmes which might simply be "harmful".
Set of questions 3.2
In relation to the protection of minors, is the distinction between broadcasting and on-demand content provision still relevant, effective and fair?
Relevant?
Yes
No
No opinion
Effective?
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Has the AVMSD been effective in protecting children from seeing/hearing content that may harm them?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
What are the costs related to implementing such requirements?
Comments:
What are the benefits related to implementing such requirements?
Comments:
Are you aware of problems regarding the AVMSD's rules related to protection of minors?
Yes (please explain)
No
Comments:
Preferred policy option:
a) Maintaining the status quo
b)Complementing the current AVMSD provisions via self- and co-regulation The status quo would be complemented with self-/co-regulatory measures and other actions (media literacy, awareness-raising).
c) Introducing further harmonisation This could include, for example, more harmonisation of technical requirements, coordination and certification of technical protection measures. Other possibilities could be the coordination of labelling and classification systems or common definitions of key concepts such as minors, pornography, gratuitous violence, impairing and seriously impairing media content.
d) Deleting the current distinction between the rules covering television broadcasting services and the rules covering on-demand audiovisual media services. This means either imposing on on-demand services the same level of protection as on television broadcasting services (levelling-up), or imposing on television broadcasting services the same level of protection as on on-demand services (levelling down).
e) Extending the scope of the AVMSD to other online content (for instance audiovisual user-generated content or audiovisual content in social media), including non-audiovisual content (for instance still images) One option could be that these services would be subject to the same rules on protection of minors as on-demand audiovisual media services.
f) Other option (please describe).
EXplain your choice:
4. Promoting European audiovisual content
The AVMSD aims to promote European works and as such cultural diversity in the EU. For television broadcasting services, the EU Member States shall ensure, where applicable and by appropriate means, a share of EU works[13] and independent productions[14]. For on-demand services, the EU Member States can choose among various options to achieve the objective of promoting cultural diversity. These options include financial contributions to production and rights acquisition of European works or rules guaranteeing a share and/or prominence of European works. The EU Member States must also comply with reporting obligations on the actions pursued to promote European works, in the form of a detailed report to be provided every two years.
Set of questions 4
Are the AVMSD provisions still relevant, effective and fair for promoting cultural diversity and particularly European works?
Relevant?
Yes
No
No opinion
Effectctive
Yes
No
No opinion
Fair?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
In terms of European works, including non-national ones (i.e. those produced in another EU country), the catalogues offered by audiovisual media service providers contain:
a) the right amount
b) too much
c) too little
d) no opinion
Comments:
Would you be interested in watching more films produced in another EU country?
Yes
No
No opinion
Comments:
Have you come across or are you aware of issues caused by the AVMSD's rules related to the promotion of EU works?
Yes (please explain)
No
Comments:
What are the benefits of the AVMSD's requirements on the promotion of European works? You may wish to refer to qualitative and/or quantitative benefits (e.g. more visibility or monetary gains).
Comments:
[...]
https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/AVMSD
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten