EUROPEAN BROAD CASTING LAW AND POLICY Part 1 ppsx

EUROPEAN BROAD CASTINGLAW AND POLICY European broadcasting policy has attracted attention from many plines because it has dual nature: cultural and commercial.. Her three principal resea

This page intentionally left blank

EUROPEAN BROAD CASTING

LAW AND POLICY

European broadcasting policy has attracted attention from many plines because it has dual nature: cultural and commercial This book offers

disci-a detdisci-ailed tredisci-atment of Europedisci-an brodisci-adcdisci-asting ldisci-aw, set disci-agdisci-ainst disci-an overview

of policy in this area In this respect the authors identify tensions within the EU polity as regards the appropriate level, purpose and mechanism

of broadcast regulation Key influences are problems of competence, the impact of changing technology and the consequences of increasing com- mercialisation Furthermore, the focus of the analysis is on the practical implications of the legal framework on viewers, and the authors distin- guish both between citizen and consumer and between the passive and active viewer The underlying question is the extent to which those most

in need of protection by regulation, given the purpose of broadcasting, are adequately protected.

jackie harrison is Professor of Public Communication at the versity of Sheffield Her three principal research interests are the study of news; European communication, information and audio-visual policy and regulation; and public service broadcasting and communication She is an established author, and has undertaken many funded research projects for the television industry.

Uni-lorna woods is Professor in Law at the University of Essex She is known for her work in the fields of EC law and, particularly, media regulation and freedom of expression She is co-author of a best-selling textbook in the field of EU law and has written a monograph on the free movement of goods and services.

EUROPEAN BROAD CASTING

LAW AND POLICY

JACKIE HARRISON AND LORNA WO ODS

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK

First published in print format

Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521848978

This publication is in copyright Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York

www.cambridge.org

hardback paperback paperback

eBook (EBL) eBook (EBL) hardback

7 Media ownership: impact on access and content 146

8 Jurisdiction, forum shopping and the ‘race to the

bottom’ 173

9 Advertising placement and frequency: balancing the needs

of viewers and commercial interests 194

10 Negative content regulation 218

11 Positive content regulation: quotas 243

12 Privatisation of sport and listed events 266

v

SERIES EDITORS’ PREFACE

In view of the economic and cultural importance of the broadcastingsector in the EU and its Member States, the appearance of this study ofEuropean broadcasting law and policy is timely The content and delivery

of broadcast media such as television are of central importance both forthe viewer and for society more generally Watching television remains

a very important leisure activity for most people Clearly technologicalinnovations such as the internet have combined with the emergence ofdigital television to produce an increasingly diverse set of ‘offerings’ forconsumers, but although internet broadcasting remains for the most part

in its infancy, at the same time the introduction of interactive services ondigital TV has led to a narrowing of the divide between what is ‘online’and what is ‘TV’

Bringing together expertise from the fields of legal and journalismstudies, the two authors fill an important gap in the available literature

by providing an analysis and critique of the role of the European Unioninstitutions in regulating broadcast media They draw an important dis-tinction in terms of seeing the viewer both as consumer and as citizen,ensuring that their analysis is not solely market-based, but is also informed

by the difficult considerations which surround the future of public servicebroadcasting, alongside commercially driven offerings

PartIof the book sets the scene, identifying the general issues whichhave shaped broadcasting policy in the EU context over the past thirtyyears, and highlighting the differing provisions of EU law which apply todifferent aspects of broadcasting policy in the context of a single market,including the regulation of ownership, content and delivery PartIIlooks

in more detail at some specific questions such as ownership, the casting of sport and advertising, which touch upon some of the mostcontroversial issues facing regulators at the present time In their analysis,the authors seek to reflect the difficulty of combining both an economicviewpoint and a cultural viewpoint in relation to the social, political andeconomic centrality of broadcasting As they note, this is complicated by

broad-vii

viii series editors’ preface

the factors which shape an EU-level response in the area of broadcastingsuch as the complex and incomplete nature of the EU’s competences inthe field, as well as the problems of regulating such a swiftly changingtechnological domain

The authors argue that broadcasting is best understood as somethingwhich can contribute to social, political and cultural purposes They findthat current broadcasting regulation at EU level takes a multi-facetedapproach to the role of broadcasting in relation to these purposes Regard-ing viewers as citizens requires a different nature of regulatory thinkingthan does regarding them as consumers in a market-place The citizen’sdomain is characterised by universal availability (even if in practice not allcitizens take up what is on offer), whereas in the consumer domain pri-vate interest considerations of ownership and access dominate: the abilityand willingness to pay is crucial The authors perceive a shift in Euro-pean broadcasting towards commercial overstatement and public serviceunderstatement, and they call for attention to be paid not merely to thecreation of European champions capable of competing globally, but also

to diversity of suppliers and content

This work makes a stimulating contribution to the interaction of pean law and broadcasting policy, and its careful and critical assessmentsand warnings are a most welcome contribution to the analysis of thecurrent and future developments in the European Union’s competence

Euro-in broadcastEuro-ing AccordEuro-ingly, we welcome this work’s appearance Euro-in theseries Cambridge Studies in European Law and Policy

Laurence Gormley

Jo Shaw

x preface

broadcasting sector in general lies outside the scope of this book Likewise,although television standards are central to the reception of television ser-vices, and copyright issues may also affect content, they too have not beencovered The law is up to date as of 31 July 2006 We have, however,included in an appendix the main issues arising from the revised text ofthe proposal as agreed by the Common Position of the Council, 24 May

2007 Although at the time of correcting proofs the European Parliamenthad yet to vote on the revised proposal, it was not envisaged that therewould be major changes to the proposal

This book is long overdue We would therefore like to thank the missioning editor and series editor for their patience We would also like

com-to thank the many friends and colleagues, com-too numerous com-to mention vidually, who have helped us, directly or indirectly, in the writing of thisbook Particular thanks must go, in no specific order, to Neil Sellors, ChrisMarsden, Steve Anderman, Christian Twigg-Flesner, Roger Brownswordand Sheldon Leader Finally, this book is in memory of Henry, who inad-vertently was responsible for starting this project off

indi-Jackie HarrisonLorna WoodsSeptember 2006

CASE LIST

Before the European Courts:

Alphabetical

Adoui and Cornaille, 115-6/81 [1982] ECR 1665

Alpine Investments BV v Minister van Financien, C-384/93, [1995] ECR

I-1141

AltmarkTrans GmbH v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, C-280/00,

[2003] nyr, judgment 24 July 2003

Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA (Simmenthal

II), 106/77, [1978] ECR 629

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Rundfunkanstalten (ARD) v PRO Sieben Media AG,

C-6/98, [1999] ECR I-7599

Binon, 243/83, [1985] ECR 2015

Bond van Adverteerders v Netherlands, 352/85,[1988] ECR 2085

Bosman, see URBSA v Bosman

Commission v Belgium, C-11/95, [1996] ECR I-4115

Commission v Belgium (Cable Access), C-211/91, [1992] ECR I-6756 Commission v Council (Titanium Dioxide Case), C-300/89, [1991] ECR

I-2867

Commission v Italy, 173/73, [1974] ECR 709

Commission v Netherlands (Mediawet), C-353/89, [1991] ECR I-4069 Commission v UK, C-222/94, [1996] ECR I-4025

Corbeau, C-320/91, [1993] ECR I-2533

xi

xii case list

Fran¸cois De Coster v Coll`ege des bourgmestre et ´echevins de Boitsfort, C-17/00, [2001] ECR I-9445

Watermael-Christelle Deli`ege v Ligue Francophone de Judo et Disciplines Associ´ees ASBL

et al., C-51/96, [2001] ECR I-2549

D´em´enagements-Manutention Transport SA, C-256/97, [1999] ECR

v Dimotiki Etairia Pliroforissis (DEP) and Sotirios Kouvela, C-260/89

[1991] ECR I-2925

Endemol v Commission, T-221/95, [1999] ECR II-1299

Est´ee Lauder Cosmetics GmbH & Co OHG v Lancaster Group GmbH,

Factortame and Others, C-221/89, [1991] ECR I-3905

Ferring v Agence Centrale des Organismes de S´ecurit´e Sociale (ACOSS),

C-53/00, [2001] ECR I-9067

FFSA, T-106/95, [1997] ECR II-229

Forbrukerombudet v Mattel Scandinavia A/S and Lego Norge A/S, E-8 &

9/94, Report of the EFTA Court 1 January 1994–30 June 1995, p 115

Garcia Avello, C-148/02, [2003] nyr, judgment 2 October 2003

Germany v Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising Directive),

C-376/98, [2000] ECR I-8419

Grzelczyck, C-184/99, [2001] ECR I-6193

Gut Springenheide and Rudolf Tusky v Oberkreisdirektor des Kreises furt-Amt f¨ur Lebensmittel¨uberwachung, C-210/96, [1998] ECR-4657 Hoffmann-La Roche & Co AG v Commission, 85/76, [1976] ECR 461 IMS Health GmbH & Co KG v NDC Health GmbH & Co KG, C-418/01,

Stein-[2004] nyr, judgment 29 April 2004

case list xiii

Infront WM AG v Commission, T-33/01, [2005] nyr, judgment 15

M6 et al v Commission, T-112/99, [2001] ECR II-2459

Mediakabel BV v Commissariaat voor de Media, C-89/04, [2005] nyr,

judgment 2 June 2005

M´etropole T´el´evision SA (M6), Antena 3 de Televisi´on, SA, Gestevisi´on Telecinco, SA and SIC – Sociedade Independente de Comunica¸c˜ao, SA v Commission, T-185, 216, 299–300/00, [2002] ECR II-3805

Metropole T´el´evision SA and Reti Televisive Italiane SpA and Gestevisi´on Telecinco SA and Antena 3 de Televisi´on v Commission, T-528, 542, 543

and 546/93, [1996] ECR II-649

Microsoft v Commission, T-201/04, Not yet decided

Microsoft v Commission, T-313/05, Not yet decided

Netherlands v Parliament and Council (Biotechnological Inventions

Case), C-377/98, [2001] ECR I-7079

NV Algemene Transport- en expeditie Onderneming Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen, 26/62, [1963] ECR 1 Omega Spielhallen – und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberb¨urger- meisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn, C-36/02, [2004] nyr, judgment 14

October 2004

Oscar Bronner v Mediaprint, C-7/97, [1998] ECR I-7791

Phillip Morris v Commission, 730/79, [1980] ECR 303

Portuguese Republic v Commission, C-42/01, [2004] nyr, judgment 22 June

2004

Procureur du Roi v Debauve, 52/79, [1980] ECR 833

R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antoinissen, C-292/89, [1991]

ECR 745

R v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte British American Tobacco, et al.,

C-491/01, [2002] ECR I-11453

R v Secretary of State for National Heritage, ex parte Continental Television

[1993] 2 CMLR 33 (Div Ct.) and [1993] 3 CMLR 387 (CA)

RTE v Commission (Magill), C-241/91P, [1995] ECR I-743

RTL and Others v Ministero delle Poste e Telecomunicazioni, C-320, 328,

329, 337-9/94, [1996] ECR I-6471

xiv case list

RTL v Nieders¨achsische Landesmedienanstalt f¨ur privaten Rundfunk,

C-245/01, [2003] nyr, judgment 23 October 2003

Rutili v Ministre de l’Interiori, 36/75, [1975] ECR 1219

15 March 2005

TV10 SA v Commissariaat voor de Media, C-23/93, [1994] ECR I-4795 United Brands Co and United Brands Continental BV v Commission, 27/76,

[1978] ECR 207

URBSA v Bosman, C-415/93, [1995] ECR I4921

Van Duyn, 41/74, [1974] ECR 1337

Vereniging Veronica Omroep Organisatie v Commissariaat voor de Media,

C-148/91, [1993] ECR I-487

Vlaams Gewest v Commission, T-214/95, [1997] ECR II-717

VT4 Limited v Vlaamse Gemeenschap, C-56/96, [1997] ECR I-3843 Wachauf v Germany, 5/88, [1989] ECR 2609

Walrave and Koch, 36/74, [1974] ECR 140

Wouters v NoVA, C-309/99, [2002] ECR I-1577

173/73, Commission v Italy, [1974] ECR 709

33/74, JHM Van Binsbergen v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereiging voor de Metaalnijverheid, [1974] ECR 1299

36/74, Walrave and Koch, [1974] ECR 140

41/74, Van Duyn, [1974] ECR 1337

36/75, Rutili v Ministre de l’int´erieur, [1975] ECR 1219

106/77, Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA

(Simmenthal II), [1978] ECR 629

52/79, Procureur du Roi v Debauve, [1980] ECR 833

730/79, Phillip Morris v Commission, [1980] ECR 303

203/80, Cassati, [1981] ECR 2595

115-6/81, Adoui and Cornaille, [1982] ECR 1665

243/83, Binon, [1985] ECR 2015

352/85, Bond van Adverteerders v Netherlands, [1988] ECR 2085

5/88, Wachauf v Germany, [1989] ECR 2609

C-221/89, Factortame and Others, [1991] ECR I-3905

C-260/89, Elliniki Radiophonia Tileorassi AE (ERT) v Dimotiki Etairia Pliroforissis (DEP) and Sotirios Kouvelas Elliniki Radiophonia Tileorassi

AE (ERT) v Dimotiki Etairia Pliroforissis (DEP) and Sotirios Kouvelas,

de Media, [1993] ECR I-487

C-211/91, Commission v Belgium (Cable Access), [1992] ECR I-6756 C-241/91P, RTE v Commission (Magill), [1995] ECR I-743

C-320/91, Corbeau, [1993] ECR I-2533

C-17/92, Distribuidores Cinematogr´aficos, [1993] ECR I-2239

T-12/93, Comit´e Central d’Entreprise de la Soci´et´e Anonyme Vittel v mission, [1995] ECR II-1247

Com-C-23/93, TV 10 SA v Commissariaat voor de Media, [1994] ECR I-4795 C-384/93, Alpine Investments BV v Minister van Financi¨en, [1995] ECR

I-1141

C-415/93, URBSA v Bosman, [1995] ECR I4921

T-528, 542, 543 and 546/93, Metropole t´el´evision SA and Reti Televisive Italiane SpA and Gestevisi´on Telecinco SA and Antena 3 de Televisi´on v Commission, [1996] ECR II-649

xvi case list

E-8 & 9/94, Forbrukerombudet v Mattel Scandinavia A/S and Lego Norge A/S, Report of the EFTA Court 1 January 1994–30 June 1995, p 115 C-222/94, Commission v UK, [1996] ECR I-4025

C-320, 328, 329, 337-9/94, RTL and Others v Ministero delle Poste e comunicazioni, [1996] ECR I-6471

Tele-C-11/95, Commission v Belgium, [1996] ECR I-4115

C–34-6/95, Konsumerntombudsmannen v De Agostini (Svenska) Forlag AB and Konsumerntombudsmannen v TV-shop i Sverige AB, [1997] ECR

I-3843

T-106/95, FFSA, [1997] ECR II-229

T-221/95, Endemol v Commission, [1999] ECR II-1299

T-214/95, Vlaams Gewest v Commission, [1997] ECR II-717

C-14/96, Criminal Proceedings against Paul Denuit, [1997] ECR I-2785 C-51/96, Christelle Deli`ege v Ligue Francophone de Judo et Disciplines Associ´ees ASBL et al., [2001] ECR I-2549

C-56/96, VT4 Limited v Vlaamse Gemeenschap, [1997] ECR I-3843 E-8/97, Sverige 1000 AB v Norwegian Government, [1998] 3 CMLR 318 C-210/96, Gut Springenheide and Rudolf Tusky v Oberkreisdirektor des Kreises Steinfurt-Amt f¨ur Lebensmittel¨uberwachung, [1998] ECR -4657 C-7/97, Oscar Bronner v Mediaprint, [1998] ECR I-7791

C-212/97, Centros v Erhvervs-og Selskabsstyrelsen, [1999] ECR I-1459 C-219/97, Drijvende Bokken and Stichting pensioenfonds voor de Vervoer-

en Havenbedrijven, [1991] ECR I-6121

C-256/97, D´em´enagements-Manutention Transport SA, [1999] ECR

C-376/98, Germany v Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising

Directive), [2000] ECR I-8419

C-377/98, Netherlands v Parliament and Council (Biotechnological

Inven-tions Case), [2001] ECR I-7079

C-528, 542, 543 & 546/98, EBU/Eurovision System, [1996] ECR II-649 T-69/99, Eurotica Rendez-vous Television Danish Satellite TV A/S v Com- mission, [2000] ECR II-4039

T-112/99, M6 et al v Commission, [2001] ECR II-2459

C-184/99, Grzelczyck, [2001] ECR I-6193

case list xvii

C-309/99, Wouters v NOVA, [2002] ECR I-1577

C-17/00, Fran¸cois De Coster v Coll`ege des bourgmestre et ´echevins de Watermael-Boitsfort, [2001] ECR I-9445

C-53/00, Ferring v Agence Centrale des Organismes de S´ecurit´e Sociale

(ACOSS), [2001] ECR I-9067

C-60/00, Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Dept., [2002] ECR

I-6279

T-185, 216, 299–300/00, M´etropole T´el´evision SA (M6), Antena 3 de visi´on, SA, Gestevisi´on Telecinco, SA and SIC – Sociedade Independente

Tele-de Comunica¸c˜ao, SA v Commission, [2002] ECR II-3805

C-280/00, AltmarkTrans GmbH v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH,

[2003] nyr, judgment 24 July 2003

T-33/01, Infront WM AG v Commission, [2005] nyr, judgment 15

Rund-C-418/01, IMS Health GmbH & Co KG v NDC Health GmbH & Co KG,

[2004] nyr, judgment 29 April 2004

C-491/01, R v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte British American Tobacco, et al., [2002] ECR I-11453

C-36/02, Omega Spielhallen – und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberb¨urgermeisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn, [2004] nyr, judgment 14

October 2004

C-148/02, Garcia Avello, [2003] nyr, judgment 2 October 2003

C-209/03, The Queen (on the application of Bidar) v London Borough of Ealing, Secretary of State for Education and Skills, [2005] nyr, judgment

15 March 2005

C-89/04, Mediakabel BV v Commissariaat voor de Media, [2005] nyr,

judgment 2 June 2005

T-201/04, Microsoft v Commission, Not yet decided

T-313/05, Microsoft v Commission, Not yet decided

European Court of Human Rights

Casado Coca v Spain (A/285), judgment 24 February 1994, (1994) 18

EHRR 1

VgT Verein gegen Tierfabriken v Switzerland (24699/94), judgment 28

June 2001, (2002) 34 EHRR 4

xviii case list

Cases before the National Courts

R v Independent Television Commission, ex parte TV Danmark 1 Ltd

Bertelsmann/CLT Commission Decision, M.779, 7 October 1996.

Bertelsmann/Kirch/Premiere Commission Decision, Case IV/M.993 OJ

[1999] L 53/1

BiB/Open Commission Decision, OJ [1999] L 312/1.

BSkyB/Kirch Pay TV Commission Decision, COMP/JV.37, 21 March 2000 Bundesliga Commission Decision, COMP/C.2–37.214, 19 January 2005.

CECED Commission Decision, Case IV F 1/36-718 OJ [2000] 187/17

CLT/Disney/SuperRTL Commission Decision, Case IV/M.566, 17 May,

38.173 and 38.453 C(2006)868 final

English Football Premier League (FAPL) Commission Decision, COMP/

38.173 and 38.453 Article 19(3), OJ [2004] C 115/02