sou · GNB355d1 · 2000-01-01 00:00:00 — Detta gäller framför allt relationen mellan, å ena sidan, telelagen och, å andra sidan, YGL och radio- och TV-lagen. Därutöver måste hänsyn tas till de övriga tillämpningsproblem som konvergensutvecklingen medför. Syftet med en samordning bör vara att avhjälpa dessa problem och att om möjligt utveckla en regelstruktur som på ett bättre sätt än främjar utvecklingen och utgör ett mer effektivt instrument för att uppfylla de politiska målsättningar som är aktuella i detta sam- manhang. Mot bakgrund av de gränsdragningsproblem som konver- gensutvecklingen medför bör en strävan vara att åstadkomma en så långtgående gemensam (horisontell) reglering av tele-, ljudradio- och TV-verksamheter som möjligt. Hänsyn måste härvid tas till de begräns- ningar i möjligheten att lagstifta som i olika avseenden följer av över- ordnade regler och internationella förpliktelser. Det handlar här främst om de begränsningar som följer av YGL samt förpliktelser enligt EG-rätten och, i fråga om användningen av radiofrekvenser, den internationella telekonventionen och radioreglementet. Min bedömning är att de bästa förutsättningarna för en horisontell reglering föreligger på området för infrastruktur. I vissa avseende torde en sådan generell tillämpning dock förutsätta grundlagsändring. Förutsättningarna för en horisontell reglering av tjänster förefaller emellertid vara sämre. Detta gäller framför allt i förhållande till krav på anmälan och tillstånd i samband med trådsändningar av ljudradio- och TV-program. Något bättre förutsättningar för en horisontell reglering av tjänster synes dock föreligga i förhållande till mobila teletjänster och trådlösa sändningar av ljudradio- och TV-program. Innehåll som sär- skilt regleringsområde saknar betydelse i förhållande till en samordning av telelagens och radio- och TV-lagens bestämmelser. Orsaken är att det ligger helt utanför de telepolitiska målen att reglera innehåll och att telelagen följaktligen saknar reglering som kan komma i konflikt med radio- och TV-lagens bestämmelser i detta avseende. Frågan om konvergensutvecklingens påverkan på innehållsreglering och behovet av samordningsåtgärder måste istället främst relateras till enskilda regelverks tillämpningsområden. Det gäller framför allt YGL:s och radio- och TV-lagens tillämpningsområden, men även gransknings- lagen berörs. Förutsättningen för att råda bot på dessa problem är framför allt en översyn av rådande begreppsstrukturer och definitioner så att respektive tillämpningsområde överensstämmer med de ändamål som avses. Några reella förutsättningar för en samordning av den inne- hållsrelaterade medielagstiftningen (radio- och TV-lagen, lagen om ansvar för elektroniska anslagstavlor samt lagen om granskning av fil- mer och videogram) föreligger inte enligt min mening. Behov av ytterligare lagstiftningsåtgärder Utöver att överväga behovet av en samordning av lagstiftningen för tele- och mediesektorerna ligger det även i mitt uppdrag att, mot bak- grund av konvergensutvecklingen, överväga behovet av ytterligare lag- stiftning för att säkerställa yttrandefrihet, tillgänglighet och mångfald samt för att motverka skadliga konkurrensbegränsningar. Det finns flera möjliga aspekter att ta upp i detta sammanhang. De aspekter som jag finner skäl att behandla närmare här kan hänföras till frågor rörande kontroll över betydelsefulla resurser, ägarkoncentrationer och andra samverkansformer samt statens ansvar inom tele- och mediesektorerna. Jag har inte funnit tillräckliga skäl för att inom ramen för den före- liggande utredningen föreslå konkreta lagstiftningsåtgärder, bl.a. med hänsyn till det pågående arbetet inom EU och den osäkerhet som präg- lar konvergensutvecklingens närmare riktning. Olika utredningar arbetar dessutom med frågor som i flera avseenden är relevanta i detta sammanhang. Däremot bör den fortsatta utvecklingen på de här aktuella områdena noga följas. Vad gäller tillgänglighet och mångfald anser jag att det finns särskilda skäl att närmare utreda dels vilka krav konvergensutvecklingen ställer på utformningen, omfattningen och finansieringen av public service och med vilka verkningsmedel detta skall åstadkommas (det är min uppfattning att public service på medieområdet kommer att ha en allt viktigare funktion i den digitala framtiden), dels i vilken utsträckning elektroniska medier kan omfattas av presstödet och vilka behov av förändringar i presstödsförordningen detta kan medföra. Utgångspunkter för det fortsatta arbetet I det fortsatta arbetet med konvergensfrågorna måste särskild hänsyn tas till de begränsningar i möjligheten att lagstifta som följer av över- ordnade regler och internationella förpliktelser. Det handlar här främst om de begränsningar som följer av YGL samt förpliktelser enligt EG-rätten och, i fråga om användningen av radiofrekvenser, den internationella telekonventionen och radioreglementet. I förhållande till EU gäller detta särskilt det intensiva arbete med konvergensfrågor som ur olika perspektiv bedrivs inom kommissionen. Detta arbete har naturligtvis till yttersta syfte att lägga en gemensam grund för behand- lingen av konvergensfrågorna inom hela unionen. Detta innebär att det fortsatta arbetet med konvergensfrågorna i i stor utsträckning måste relateras till en utveckling som vi inte själva fullt ut råder över men däremot har möjlighet att påverka. Förslag till hur det fortsatta arbetet bör bedrivas På grund av komplexiteten i frågeställningarna och konvergensområdets gränsöverskridande karaktär anser jag det av synnerlig vikt att det fortsatta arbetet med konvergensfrågorna samordnas. Utöver det arbete som sker inom ramen för pågående utredningar och de initiativ och åtgärder som mina slutsatser i övrigt kan föranleda inom ramen för respektive departementsområde, föreslår jag därför att det fortsatta arbetet samordnas inom ramen för en departementsövergripande beredning, eventuellt med parlamentariskt inslag. Beredningens uppgift bör utifrån ett övergripande perspektiv och rådande politiska målsätt- ningar bl.a. vara att utarbeta underlag för val av samordningsstrategi och genomförandeplan, där bl.a. arbetet inom pågående utredningar och inom EU beaktas. My terms of reference require me to investigate the need for coordi- nating the legislation applying to radio and television broadcasting and telecommunications and in this context to consider whether further legislation is needed in order to safeguard freedom of expression, availability and diversity and to counteract harmful restraints on trade. I am also to propose ways in which the ongoing work with reference to matters of convergence should be conducted. My deliberations are to be based on a description of the development of electronic information services. Against this background I am to chart and analyse the extent to which the existing legislation is appli- cable to electronic information services and the way in which the leg- islation affects their design, use and distribution. In this connection I have chosen to interpret the expression electronic information serv- ices in a broad sense, focusing on the development and provision of services and infrastructure within the framework of IT, telecommuni- cations and media activities. Services connected with physical data car- riers, however, fall for the best part outside this account. It is further stated in the terms of reference that I am to observe and take into con- sideration the work in progress within the EU. In addition I have found it beneficial, both for the progress of the inquiry and to continuing work with reference to matters of convergence, to give a special account of the treatment of these questions in a number of countries. Convergence as a phenomenon can be described in various ways, depending on the perspective which is being discussed, and with varying degrees of complexity. The conditions which, in the context of technical progress, are leading to the convergence of infrastructures, services and apparatus are fundamental. To this are added the market movements whereby agents in different sectors are involving themselves with one or more neighbouring sectors. In terms of my remit, it is relevant to describe the effects of convergence in relation to network convergence, convergence of services, apparatus convergence and market convergence. Network convergence: Network convergence implies the possibility of different, traditionally separate infrastructures for the distribution of services of different kinds being integrated so as to carry each others services. Above all this concerns, one the one hand, infrastructures intended for private communication, such as telecommunications and mobile telephony networks, and on the other, infrastructures intended for one-way transmission of information to the general public, e.g. ter- restrial networks, cable networks and satellite systems for sound radio and/or television broadcasting. Service convergence: Service convergence means the amalgama- tion, in various respects, of services of different kinds. Above all it concerns communication services, conveying information between users (e.g. telephony, fax, video conferencing and e-mail) and, secondly, content services, in which a provider supplies or procures a certain content for others to make use of (e.g. radio and television broadcasting, information databases and web sites on the Internet). In addition, service convergence also implies information previously associated with a particular medium coming to be supplied through alternative media (e.g. books on CD, rental video cassettes and video-on-demand, and newspapers and magazines and electronic services on the Web). Apparatus convergence: Apparatus convergence refers to the amalgamation of different types of apparatus used for different types of service, as for example when telephones and radio receivers can also be used for receiving text and moving images, television receivers and mobile phones can be used for information processing, like computers, and computers themselves can serve as television receivers. Market convergence: Convergence of networks, services and apparatus makes it both possible and interesting and, to some extent, necessary for business enterprises formerly in a particular sector to involve themselves in various ways in one or more neighbouring sec- tors. This can, for example, mean telecommunications enterprises entering the media market by producing/supplying/purveying content services, media enterprises investing in infrastructure, and IT enter- prises acting in the telecommunications and media markets by offering communications equipment and producing content services. To this are added new enterprises which grow up independently of the traditional sectors and provide multimedia services of various kinds. The legal consequences of convergence are revealed by the increasing difficulty, against this background, of distinguishing between the IT, telecommunications and media markets which used to be relatively clearly segregated: one and the same service can, for example, come under different, possibly several, regulatory instruments, depending on the medium or channel of communication used for conveying it to the recipient or on the in which the recipient obtains the service. This has to be viewed against the background of the regulatory instruments of these sectors being framed on different premisses, with different underlying motives and with different authorities in charge. In addition, technical progress is also creating new types of services and phenomena and new possibilities of conducting telecommunications and media activities whose subjection to the existing regulatory systems may not be very practical or convenient. This not only changes the ability of the existing regulatory instruments to serve their purpose, it also affects the basic preconditions and assumptions of existing law. European Community law has a great impact on national law. The legi- slative activities of Member States are in principle affected in two ways. For one thing, the Member States have to take measures to give effect to the directives issued by Community institutions, and secondly, they must refrain from passing legislation which is contrary to European Community law. In the telecommunications sector, European Community law is fairly comprehensive and detailed in its de-regulation of the telecom- munications market and with regard to harmonisation of, for example, conditions governing access to and use of publicly available telecom- munications networks and services. In the broadcasting sector, for example, the Television without Frontiers directive regulates the free movement and content of television broadcasting services. In addition, technical issues in the broadcasting sector come under the directive on standards for the transmission of television signals. As regards the regulation of the information society by European Community law, a number of different measures have been taken to harmonise the legi- slation of Member States in this field and to promote the development of the information society. They include technical standards and regu- lations, databases, data protection, conditional access, electronic com- merce and copyright. Within the EU, extensive work is in progress on guidelines for adjusting the legal framework to the progress of convergence. Since the Commission has issued a , a working document and a communication on convergence. In its communication the Commission states that it intends to develop proposals for action on regulatory reform. Infrastructure regulation is to be given a more hori- zontal approach, i.e. the same rules are to apply regardless of infra- Proposals for the regulation of content services will mean either adjustments to existing regulations or the proposal of new regu- lations altogether. In addition, special measures are planned with regard to the regulation of both content and infrastructure, and the Commission is to issue a Communication on the general consultation concerning its radio spectrum . Work on convergence issues, together with the review of telecommunications regulations in progress during 1999 and work with the radio spectrum , are expected to lead to proposals for amendments to European Community law on the communications sector within the next two years. Conditions in some other countries The report contains a general review of the treatment of convergence issues in thirteen other countries. For each country an account is given of the legislation applying to telecommunications and media respectively, of the authorities in these fields and of particular measures taken in response to convergence. Convergence issues are being observed in all the countries dealt with, albeit in different ways and to differing extents. Certain countries have passed legislation which, in various ways and to various degrees, is adapted to a convergence development. This is the case, for example, with , , , , the and . Government inquiries are in progress or have been completed in , , the , the UK, , and . In the authorities are awaiting measures at EU level before taking any concrete initiatives. Swedish law and its applicability in a convergence perspective The analysis of Swedish law embraces 17 statutes and shows that con- vergence is leading to problems of demarcation and interpretation. The root cause of these problems is the ways in which the respective fields of application of the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression (1991:1469), the Radio and Television Act (1996:844) and the Tele- communications Act (1993:597), are limited, among other things in relation to one another. The problems occurring can be summarised in the following four perspectives. Firstly, convergence means that the same type of service and the same content can be differently regulated, depending on what is pro- vided on each occasion, in what it is provided (as a transmission to the general public or by individual request), what receiving equipment is used and, in certain respects, the identity of the provider. Secondly, convergence means that the Telecommunications Act, the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and the Radio and Televi- sion Act can be both alternately and simultaneously applicable within the context of the same range of services, and also to what the recipient may perceive as one and the same service. This also means that one and the same activity can similarly, either alternately or simultaneously, be governed by several regulatory structures, each with its own par- ticular stipulations regarding the in which the activity is to be conducted and each enforceable by different authorities. Thirdly, the development described means that, in relation to the Act (1993:599), it is becoming increasingly difficult to draw a line between frequency use of relevance to the free- doms of expression and information and other frequency uses. This, furthermore, has to be viewed against the background of both the national frequency allocation plan and the frequency allocation plan which follows from the the Radio Regulations linked to the International Telecommunications Convention, laying down the frequencies reserved for radio applications of different kinds. Fourthly, there is uncertainty in several respects regarding the way in which terms, definitions and delimitations are to be interpreted and applied. This accentuates the effects of the problems described above. These uncertainties relate above all to the implementation of the main rule of the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression concerning transmissions intended for the general public, the definition of sound broadcasting, television and searchable text TV under the Radio and Television Act, and the delimitation of the Telecommunications Act in relation to the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and, indi- rectly, as a consequence, also in relation to the Radio and Television Act. This affects not only the line of demarcation between the Tele- communications Act on the one hand and the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and the Radio and Television Act on the other, but also, in several respects, the application of other statutes. In addition to the uncertainties applying in these respects, convergence also entails problems of application in relation to other specialised legislation in the media sector. Co-ordination of legislation concerning radio broadcasting, television and telecommunications activities In view of the consequences of convergence for the application of ex- isting law, my conclusion is that the legislation involved here is in need of co-ordination. This applies above all to the relation between the Telecommunications Act on the one hand and the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and the Radio and Television Act on the other. In addition, consideration must be paid to the other problems of imple- mentation which convergence entails. The purpose of co-ordination should be to remedy these problems and, if possible, to develop a regulatory structure which, in a better way than at present, will promote development and at the same time consti- tute a more effective instrument for achieving the policy aims existing in this connection. In view of the problems of demarcation entailed by convergence, one aim should be to achieve as extensive a horizontal regulation of telecommunications, sound broadcasting and television activities as possible. In doing so, consideration must be paid to the limitations imposed on the scope for legislation in various respects by overriding rules and international commitments. Above all these com- prise the limitations entailed by the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and obligations under Community law and, as regards the use of radio frequencies, by the international Telecommunications Convention and the Radio Regulation. It is my belief that the best opportunities for horizontal regulation exist in the infrastructure context. In certain respects, however, a gen- eral implementation of this kind will probably require an amendment of constitutional law. Opportunities for horizontal regulation of services, however, appear to be less good. This applies above all in relation to notification and permit requirements connected with cable transmissions of radio and television programmes. Opportunities for a horizontal regulation of services appear, however, to be slightly better in the case of mobile telephone services and transmission of radio and television programmes. Content as a special regulatory field is of no importance in relation to a co-ordination of the provisions of the Telecommunications Act and the Radio and Television Act, the reason being that regulation of content comes completely outside the scope of telecommunications policy aims, so that the Telecommunications Act contains no provisions that are liable to come into conflict with the pro- visions of the Radio and Television Act in this respect. Instead the question of the impact of convergence on content regu- lation and the need for measures of co-ordination must above all be viewed in relation to the application fields of individual regulatory instruments. This applies primarily to the application fields of the Fun- damental on Freedom of Expression and the Radio and Television Act. The precondition for remedying these problems is above all a review of prevailing conceptual structures and definitions, so that each field of application will agree with the purpose referred to. The need for further legislative measures In addition to considering the need for a co-ordination of the legislation applying to the telecommunications and media sectors, my remit also includes considering, against the background of convergence, the need for further legislation in order to safeguard freedom of expression, accessibility and diversity, and in order to counteract harmful trade restraints. There are several possible aspects to be considered in this connection. Those which I find cause to consider more closely here can be referred to questions concerning control of important resources, ownership concentrations and other forms of co-operation, as well as governmental responsibilities in the telecommunications and media sectors. I have not found sufficient cause, within the scope of the present inquiry, to propose concrete legislative measures, bearing in mind, among other things, the work now in progress within the EU and the uncertainty which prevails concerning the more exact direction to be taken by convergence. In addition, various official bodies are currently investigating questions which are in several ways relevant to this con- text. On the other hand, a close watch should be kept on further develo- pments in these fields. With regard to availability and diversity, I feel there is special cause for a closer investigation, not only of the demands made by convergence on the design, scope and funding of public service in the digital future and the means by which this is to be achieved (it is my opinion that the importance of public service in the media sector will increase), but also of the extent to which electronic media can be eligible for press subsidies and the changes which this may necessitate to the Statute of annual Press Subsidies (1990:524). Points of departure for continued work In further work with reference to convergence issues, special attention must be paid to the limitation proposed by overarching rules and inter- national obligations on the scope for legislation. Above all this concerns the limitations entailed by the Fundamental on Freedom of Expression and obligations under European Community law and, as regards the use of radio frequencies, by the international Tele- communications Convention and the Radio Regulation.