NoC108/16 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 19.4.93
tomatoproducts',shouldbeincreaseduptoa
maximumof15%inspecificshort-termcircumstances .
3.1.3.Itshouldalsobemadepossibletoraisethe
5%limitsetoutinArticle1.2,thirdindent,fortransfer
from'otherproducts'to'concentrate',uptoamaximumof15%inspecificshort-termcircumstances .
3.1.4.Article1.3(c)shouldbecompletedasfollows:
'Wherethequantityconstitutedusingthe2%
reserveisnotfullyusedorispartlyusedfornew
initiatives,itshallbereturnedtothequantitytobe
assignedtoindividualundertakings.'
DoneatBrussels,24February1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)amendingRegulation (EEC)
No2299/89onaCodeofConductforComputerizedReservationSystems
(93/C108/05)
On11February1993,theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee
underArticle84(2)oftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunityonthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforTransportandCommunications ,whichwasresponsibleforpreparingthe
Committee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon12February1993.TheRapporteur
wasMrMoreland.
Atits303rdPlenarySession(meetingof24February1993),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
1.Introduction Councilagreedaregulationonacodeofconductfor
computerizedreservationsystems.TheCommitteegave
itsOpinionontheseproposals.TheRegulationislarge­
lyreflectiveoftheCommittee'sOpinion.1.1.Therehasbeenconcernthatthedevelopment
ofcomputerreservationsystems(CRS)ownedbyairline
companiesmayoperatemoreintheinterestsofpromot­
ingthoseairlinesthaninensuringthattravelagentsare
abletopresentacomprehensive andobjectivedisplay
ofairlineservicesavailabletothecustomer.1.3.Article2.3oftheCouncilregulationstated'The
CouncilshalldecideontherevisionofthisRegulation
by31December1992onthebasisofaCommission
proposaltobesubmittedby31March1992
accompanied byareportontheapplicationofthis
Regulation'.However,thereportandthedraftproposal
werenotpublishedbytheCommissionuntillatein
1992.1.2.Asaresultofthisconcern,theCommission
agreedinJuly1988ablockexemptionregulationon
certaincategoriesofagreementsbetweenundertakings
relatingtoCRSforairtransport.InJuly1989the

19.4.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoG108/17
2.TheReportontheapplicationoftheRegulation
2.1.ThemainfeaturesoftheReportareasfollows
2.1.1.InitiallynoCRSoperatingintheCommunity
wasabletofulfiltherequirementssetbythecode
immediatelyandwaiversweregivenbytheCommission
tothesystemvendorstovariousdates.AHhadexpired
by31December1990.
2.1.2.TheCommissionhasreceived15complaints
(toAugust1992)and14requestsforinterpretation .
Mostweresettledonavoluntarybasis.Nofineshave
beenimposedsofar.Mostconcernthedisplayofinfor­
mation.3.1.1.Thereanumberofpointsofclarificationor
modification :
—includingcorporateusersandmakingclearthe
extentoftheexclusionofairlineoffices;
—strengtheningthequalityofdataprovided;
—clarifyingthedisplayandrankingcriteria(particu­
larlyinrelationtocode-sharingand/orjointventure
flights);
—givingthesystemvendormoreprotectioninthe
contextofparticipatingcarrierbreakingcontracts;
—givinggreaterfreedomtousethirdpartysoftware
thatiscompatible;
—settingminimumstandardsforbilling;
—strengtheningthepositionasregardsthirdcountry
systemsthatdiscriminateagainstECairlines.
3.1.2.Thenon-scheduled servicesareincluded.This
isclearlyalogicalconsequenceofthethirdairpackage
butitstillallowsnon-scheduled servicestobeclearly
identified.2.1.3.TheCommission isnowworkinginclose
cooperationwiththeEuropeanCivilAviationConfer­
ence(ECAC)anditishopedthatboththeCommunity
andECACwillhavesimilartexts.TheInternational
CivilAviationOrganizationhasadoptedacodeof
conductbutthisdoesnotgoasfarastheECcode
particularlyinpresentingthewayinwhichservices
shouldbedisplayed.
2.1.4.TheCommission believesthecodeofconduct
needstobereviewedinthelightofthefollowing:
a)theexperienceofthecodesofarandthechanging
technicalandmarketingdevelopmentintheCRS
section;
b)the'ThirdAirPackage'whichremovesthedistinc­
tionbetweenscheduledandnon-scheduled services;
c)thepossibilityforownersofaCRSvirtuallyto
barmarketentryforotherCRSsbyrefusingto
participateandsopreventinginformationontheir
flightsbecomingavailablethroughrivalsystems
(thissubjectwascoveredintherecentblockexemp­
tionandintheconsequentOpinionoftheCom­
mittee).
d)thepossibilitythataparentcarriercreatesacloser
connectionbetweenontheonehanditsowninven­
tory(schedulesandseatavailability )andonthe
otherhanditsexternallymarketedCRS,thereby
creatingadvantagesconcerningtheavailabilityof
information (thisissueisusuallyreferredtoas
'dehosting'.)3.1.3.TheCommissionproposesthatanaircarrier
mustprovidetoacompetingCRS,onrequest,thesame
informationonschedules,faresandavailabilityonits
servicesasitprovidestoitsownCRSandtoaccept
bookingsonitsflightsfromtheseotherCRS.
3.1.4.Itenvisagesanumberofdifficultiesintaking
intoaccounttheissueof'dehosting'[asoutlinedin2.1.4
d)]interaliawhether'dehosting *itselfwilleliminatethe
problemandpoliticaldifficultieswiththirdcountries
(althoughnotstated,thisisbecausetheissuelargely
concerns'Sabre'and'Apollo',theUSbasedsystems).
However,theCommissiondoesproposetolaydown
principlesandinArticle4.4itstates'aparentcarrier
shallnotreserveanyspecificloadingand/orprocessing
procedureforitself.
4.Generalcomments
3.TheCommissionproposal
3.1.TheCommission'sproposalsarebasedonthe
pointsoutlinedin2.1.4aboveasfollows.4.1.Subjecttothespecificcomments,theCommittee
welcomestheCommission'sproposedrevisionofthe
CodeofConduct.

NoC108/18 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 19.4.93
5.4.Article3bis 4.2.TheCommitteewelcomesthecooperationwith
theEuropeanCivilAviationConference (ECAC)and
notesthattherevisiontakesintoaccountthedetailed
discussionwithECAC.5.4.1.AscompetitionbetweentheCRSvendorsis
desirableforpassengersandmostairlines,theprinciple
thatairlinesinadominantmarketpositionshouldbe
forcedtomakeavailableinformationinallCRSsshould
besupported.Definingtheextentofthisisnoteasybut
theCommissionsolutionisareasonablecompromise .
However,3(b)isnotentirelyclearorpreciseandthere
shouldbeadequatesafeguardsagainsthighcostsfor
smallairlines.4.3.Whilewelcomingthepublicationofthereport
ontheworkingoftheCRSregulation^),theCom­
mitteerepeatsitspointontheoriginalCodeproposal
(4.12)thattheCommissionshould'reportannually
howmanycomplaintsithasreceivedandhowmany
havebeenupheld';itshouldalsoreportontheirnature
andalsowhatactionhasbeentaken.
5.4.2.Thissubjectisalsocoveredbythe(draft)
blockexemptiontothecompetitionrulesonwhichthe
CommitteehasalreadygivenanOpinion.Astheblock
exemptionwillnotcoversystemswithonlyoneowner
itisnecessarytoincludeaclauseinthiscodeofconduct
covering'mandatoryparticipation'.TheCommittee
stressesthattheCouncilDecisiononthiscodeandthe
blockexemption (whichisaCommissiondecision)
shouldbeconsistent .4.4.Thisregulationdoesnotcoverallaccessingof
confidentialinformationinacomputerreservationsys­
tembyanairlineotherthanthatwhichhasprovided
theinformation (asintherecentBritishAirways/Virgin
case).Thisaccessingshouldbeillegalunlessithasbeen
donewiththepermissionoftheprovider.Ifthisisnot
coveredintheCouncilDecisiononthedraftData
ProtectionDirectivetheCommissionshouldmakea
proposaltocoverthesubject.
5.5.Article7
5.Specificcomments5.5.1.ItshouldbeclarifiedthatallCRSstowhich
theCodeappliesareregulatedasregardstheirdisplay
ofworld-wideroutes.
5.1.Article2(a,bandc)
5.6.Article8.15.1.1.Inthelightofthevirtualeliminationofthe
distinctionintheThirdAirPackagebetweenscheduled
andnon-scheduled airservices,theCommitteeagrees
thatnon-scheduled flightsshouldbecoveredbythe
Codewitharequirementthatsuchflightsshouldbe
clearlyidentified.5.6.1.Itisnotclearwhetheritisacceptableornot
foraparentcarrierwhodoesnotdistributecertain
faresthroughitsCRStodosothroughatravelagent
withincentives.Therecouldbeenforcementdifficulties
where,forexample,somefaresweremadeavailable
fordistributionoutsidetheCRSbutonconditionthat
thatcarrier'sCRSwasusedtotheexclusionofothers. 5.2.Article2(o)(unchangedfromoriginal)
5.2.1.Thephrase'serviceenhancement'isusedina
differentcontextintheUSCode.Inanyevent,the
wordingoftheclauseisnotclear.Consequentlythe
clauseshouldberevised.5.7.Article9.3
5.7.1.BecausethisArticlerefersto'serviceenhance­
ment':ThisshouldberevisedifArticle2(o)isrevised
(see5.2.1). 5.3.Article3.2(C)
5.8.Article10.25.3.1.TheCommitteesupportstherevisionofthe
clause.Howeverthephrase(fromtheoriginal)'need
not'isvagueandshouldbe'shallnot'.
5.8.1.TheCommitteeconsidersthatthisshouldbe
moreprecise.Considerationshouldbegiventodescrib­
inginmoredetailtheinformationthatshouldbe
included.(MOJNoC56,6.3.1989.

19.4.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC108/19
5.9.Annex
5.9.1.Paragraph 6
5.9.1.1.Addattheend:'andnumberofstops
shown'.
5.9.2.Paragraph 7
5.9.2.1.Tostart:'Systemvendorsshallbegiventhe
appropriateinformationforcode-sharing...'Insertfull
stopbetween'...ventureflights'and'theaircarrier...'.
5.9.2.2.Thisplacestheresponsibilityontheinfor­
mationproviders.
5.9.3.Paragraph 9
5.9.3.1.Thesystemvendorshouldalsoaccept
requestsfortheinclusionofindirectservices.Non­scheduledservicesarepresumablynotincluded.The
textshouldmakethisclearwhilealsomakingitclear
thatthereisnothingtopreventthemfrombeing
included.
5.9.4.Paragraph 10
5.9.4.1.Asthisparagraphislinkedtoparagraphs7
and8itshouldberepositionedbefore9.
\6.Otherconsiderations
6.1.TheCommitteeagreeswiththeCommission's
approachto'dehosting'atthisstage,butsuggeststhat
amoredetailedexamination shouldbemadewith
aviewtofurtherchangestotheRegulationand/or
agreementwiththeUnitedStatesonapolicyonthis
subject.
DoneatBrussels,24February1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN