Notice pursuant to Article 19(3) of Council Regulation No 17 — Case COMP/C1/N.38.369 — Rahmenvertrag T-Mobile Deutschland/VIAG Interkom (Notification) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2002-08-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: exchange of information, framework agreement, inter-company agreement, telecommunications, transmission network

C 189/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.8.2002

NOTICE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 19(3) OF COUNCIL REGULATION No 17

Case COMP/C1/N.38.369 — Rahmenvertrag T-Mobile Deutschland/VIAG Interkom (Notification)

(2002/C 189/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1. INTRODUCTION

1. On 1 February 2002, T-Mobile Deutschland GmbH
(‘T-Mobile’) and VIAG Interkom GmbH (‘VIAG’) notified
to the Commission a
framework agreement of 20
September 2001 concerning infrastructure sharing and
national roaming for the third generation of GSM mobile
telecommunications (‘3G’) on the German market. In their
notification T-Mobile
and VIAG (‘The parties’) have
requested either negative clearance under Article 81(1) or
an exemption under Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty (1).

2. In February 2002 the Commission published a first notice
summarising the notified agreement and inviting third
party comments (2). The Commission has now finished
its examination of the notified agreement and has come
to a preliminary position. The present notice is published
pursuant to Article 19(3) of Regulation No 17/62 in order
to enable third parties to provide their comments on the
Commission's proposed approach. Third parties may
submit
their comments to the Commission within a
deadline of one month from publication of this notice in
the Official Journal.

2. THE PARTIES

3. T-Mobile is an operator of digital mobile telecommuni-
in Germany using the
cations networks and services
GSM family of
standards. T-Mobile operates a GSM
network and provides GSM services in Germany based
on a GSM 900 licence, and was awarded a universal
licence in
mobile telecommunications
Germany in August 2000 (3).
is wholly owned by
T-Mobile International AG, which in turn is a wholly
fixed network
incumbent
owned subsidiary of
operator Deutsche Telekom AG (‘DTAG’).

system (UMTS)

the

It

4. T-Mobile International AG owns interests in mobile tele-
in the United Kingdom

communications operators

(1) The Commission has also received a related notification from BT
Cellnet Limited (and BT 3G Limited) and One2One Personal
Communications Limited dated 6 February 2002 relating to a 3G
Network Deployment and 3G Bilateral Roaming Agreement for the
UK. This
(Case
agreement
COMP/N.38.370 — UK Agreement).

is being dealt with separately

(2) OJ C 53, 28.2.2002, p. 18.
(3) In August 2000, the German Government awarded six 3G licences
following a frequency auction procedure worth EUR 50,8 billion.
The companies awarded the licences were T-Mobil, Vodafone-
Mannesmann, E-Plus, Viag Interkom Group, Group 3G and
Mobilcom multimedia.

(One2One, T-Motion, Virgin Mobile), Austria (max.mobil.),
the Czech Republic (Radiomobil) and the USA (Voice-
Stream). T-Mobile International AG also has subsidiaries
active in the Netherlands (BEN, CMobil), Russia (MTS)
and Poland (PTC). In the 2000 financial year, T-Mobile
International AG had a worldwide turnover of EUR 6,5
turnover of
billion and DTAG had a worldwide
EUR 40,9 billion.

formerly BT Cellnet

5. VIAG likewise operates digital mobile telecommunications
networks and services in Germany, based on a GSM 1800
licence awarded in 1997, and was awarded a UMTS licence
in August 2000. VIAG is a wholly owned subsidiary of
mmO2 plc,
limited, a company
previously controlled by British Telecommunications plc.
mmO2 operates, through its subsidiaries, networks in the
UK (BT Cellnet
and BT3G), Germany (VIAG), The
Netherlands (Telfort), the Republic of Ireland (Digifone)
and the Isle of Man (Manx Telecom). In 2000, the BT
turnover of
group of
EUR 31 billion.

companies had a worldwide

3. PRODUCTS/SERVICES

6. 3G services are mobile communications systems capable of
supporting in particular innovative multimedia services,
beyond the capability of second generation systems such
as GSM, and capable of combining the use of terrestrial
and satellite components (4). These services are char-
acterised by their (i) multimedia capabilities, full mobility
and low mobility applications in different geographical
environments beyond 2G capabilities; (ii) efficient access
Intranets and other Internet protocol-based
to Internet,
(iii) high quality speech transmission commen-
services;
surate with that of fixed networks; (iv) service portability
across 3G environments;
(v) operation in one seamless
environment including full roaming with GSM as well as
between the terrestrial and satellite components of UMTS
networks. With this agreement the parties aim to enter the
German national market or markets for 3G infrastructure
and wholesale roaming services. Although the agreement
promotes their individual entry into the market or markets
for 3G retail services the agreement does not directly relate
to retail markets.

(4) ‘The introduction of third generation mobile communications in the
European Union: state of play and the way forward’ (COM(2001)
141 final of 20 March 2001).

9.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 189/23

7. The products/services that are directly concerned by this
notification are (a) access to and use of 3G infrastructure,
and (b) wholesale access to 3G national roaming. Actual or
potential competitors in these markets are the other four
licensees for 3G networks and services in Germany, and
potential competitors may be third parties reselling access
to and wholesale roaming services on the network of these
other operators or on the parties' networks. As 3G
networks and services have not yet been rolled out no
conclusive estimate of market shares or assessment of
the substitutability between 2G and 3G services can at
present be provided.

4. LEGAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

4.1. The

development
communications in the EU

of

third

generation mobile

harmonising frequency use and promoting a common and
open standard for the provision of compatible UMTS
services throughout Europe.

10. Finally,

situation

telecommunications

the combination of

of
the EU and of

in March 2001 the Commission published a
the state of play and the
Communication setting out
way forward for the introduction of
third generation
mobile communications in the EU (8)). This Communi-
the difficult
cation takes note of
financial
operators
throughout
the high infrastructure
investment costs involved that lead operators to engage
in infrastructure sharing arrangements. It concludes that
economically beneficial sharing of network infrastructure
should
the
competition rules and other relevant Community law are
respected (9). In its recent follow up communication (10),
it would continue to
the Commission emphasised that
work with national administrations towards establishing
a best practice approach for network sharing.

encouraged,

provided

principle

be

in

8. So far digital mobile communications networks and
services in the EU have been based on the GSM family
of standards. European telecommunication companies are
at present developing and preparing the roll-out of mobile
communication networks and services using the third
generation (‘3G’) of the GSM family of standards (5). 3G
will combine wireless mobile technology with high data
transmission capacities and facilitate consumer access to
Internet services through their mobile handsets. Its devel-
opment in the EU is based on a common technological
platform — universal mobile telecommunications system
(‘UMTS’), on the harmonisation of the radio spectrum and
on the definition of a harmonised regulatory environment.

9. To meet

these harmonisation objectives,

the European
Parliament and the Council have in 1997 adopted a
directive on a common framework for general authoris-
ations and individual licences in the field of telecommuni-
cations services (6). This was followed at the end of 1998
by a decision on the coordinated introduction of a third-
generation mobile and wireless communication system
(UMTS) in the Community (7)). It required Member States
to enable the introduction of UMTS services on their
territory by 1 January 2002 and emphasised the role of
technical bodies such as the European Conference of Postal
and Telecommunications Administrations
(‘CEPT’) and
Europe Telecommunications Standard Institute (‘ETSI’) in

4.2. Network sharing

11. The basic distinction that is relevant in the context of the
parties' network sharing agreement is that between the
Radio Access Network (‘RAN’) and the core or backbone
network.

12. RAN:

site

this

sites,

includes mast/antenna

support
cabinets (‘SSC’) and power supply, as well as antennas,
combiners and transmission links, Nodes B, i.e. the base
stations that receive and send data across frequencies and
control a particular network cell, and the radio network
controllers (‘RNCs’) that each control a number of such
Nodes B and that are linked to the core network.

13. Core network: this is the intelligent part of the network
that consists of mobile switching centres (‘MSCs’), various
support nodes, services platforms, client home location
is
registers and operation and maintenance centres.
linked to the fixed ISDN (integrated services digital
network) and Internet networks.

It

(5) The first generation was GSM 900, the second generation DCS
1800 (now referred to as GSM 1800); GPRS is often regarded as
an intermediate step (or ‘2.5 G’) between 2G and 3G.

(6) Directive 97/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 10 April 1997 (OJ L 117, 1997, p. 15). This Directive sets out
the procedures associated with the granting of authorisations for
the purpose of providing telecommunications services and the
conditions attached to such authorisations.

(7) Decision No 128/1999/EC of the European Parliament and of the

Council of 14 December 1998 (OJ L 17, 1998, p. 1).

(8) ‘The introduction of third generation mobile communications in
state of play and the way forward’

the European Union:
(COM(2001) 141 final of 20 March 2001).

(9) Ibidem, paragraph 4.3.
(10) Towards the full roll-out of third generation mobile communi-

cations' (COM(2002) 301 final of 11 June 2002).

C 189/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.8.2002

14. 3G network sharing can take place at a number of
different levels and involve varying degrees of cooperation.
The degree of
independence retained by an operator
depends on which network elements are being shared
and their remaining ability to install separate elements
(planning freedom). Ranked by the increasing degree to
which the network is shared it is possible to distinguish
between shared use of:

— sites, which ranges from sharing individual mast sites
up to grid sharing (requiring a uniform layout of
networks), and may include site support infrastructure,
such as site support cabinets (SSC),

— base stations (Nodes B) and antennas,

— radio network controllers (‘RNCs’),

— core networks,

including mobile switching centres

(‘MSCs’) and various databases,

— frequencies.

Finally, national roaming concerns a situation where the
operators concerned do not share any network elements as
such but simply use each other's network to provide
services to their own customers.

15. In their notification the parties use the term ‘extended site
sharing’ for shared use of infrastructure up to the level of,
but not including, Nodes B and RNCs (i.e. the first bullet
point above). They reserve the term ‘RAN sharing’
for
common use of the entire radio access network, up to
and including Nodes B and RNCs (i.e. the first, second
and third bullet points above). The parties do not
envisage
their
agreement does cover national roaming outside the areas
where they engage in extended site sharing, respectively in
RAN sharing.

networks,

sharing

their

core

but

licences set out parameters for network sharing. These
include:

— network roll-out requirements in terms of effective
coverage related to a specific timetable, notably a
requirement to cover 25 % of the population by the
end of 2003 and 50 % of the population by the end of
2005 that cannot be met by means of national
roaming but can be met by shared infrastructure,

— general obligations as regard e.g. site and antenna
sharing relating to planning restrictions and environ-
mental concerns,

— limitations as regards the extent of network sharing
allowed related to e.g. sharing network intelligence
and sensitive customer data.

regulatory

17. For the notified agreement the responsible national tele-
the
communications
German Regulatory Authority for Post and Telecommuni-
cations (Regulierungsbehörde für Telekommunikation und
Post — ‘RegTP’). RegTP published general guidance in June
2001 in which it took a favourable view of infrastructure
sharing provided certain conditions were met (11).

authority

(‘NRA’)

is

18. In particular RegTP excluded sharing of the core network
and the pooling of spectrum, but allowed sharing of sites,
masts, antennas, cables and combiners as well as shared
used of site support cabinets, and the shared use of
logically distinct Node Bs as well as RNCs (12), provided
that:

— each licence holder has independent control of their

own logical Node B, respectively RNC,

— there is no exchange of data (such as customer data)

beyond that required for technical operations,

4.3. The national regulatory framework

— separation of operation and maintenance centres,

16. In addition to Community law, the applicable national
licensing and regulatory requirements must be taken into
infrastructure
account
sharing (11).
regulatory
framework in Germany and the terms of the parties' 3G

context of network
general

in the
Both

national

the

(11) A number of other national regulatory authorities (NRAs) in the
EU issued guidance on the conditions on which infrastructure
sharing would be consistent with the national licensing and regu-
latory requirements.
In Germany, RegTP published its Interpre-
tation of the UMTS award conditions in light of more recent tech-
nological advance, RegTP (6 June 2001), available at www.regtp.de.
In May 2001, Oftel, the UK NRA, published a note for information
on ‘3G mobile infrastructure sharing in the UK’, available at
http://www.oftel.gov.uk/publications/mobile/infrashare0501.htm.
The Dutch and French NRAs have published similar guidance
documents, which
at
available
http://www.opta.nl/download/
concept_notitie_nma_vw_opta_umts_netwerken_190701.pdf
at http://www.art-telecom.fr/dossiers/umts/partage-infras.htm.

their websites

and

are

on

— additional own Nodes B respectively additional own
RNCs can be operated to guarantee planning inde-
pendence and the operator's own Nodes B operated
solely by himself are connected to own logical RNCs,

— there is no regional division of coverage areas that
rules out overlapping network and coverage areas;
i.e. parties may not agree to each cover only a
distinct and different geographical area and rely on
roaming on each other's network in those areas
where their own network does not have coverage.

(12) ‘Logically distinct’ means that a single physical network element,
due to its programming, can perform logically distinct operations
for the two networks, as if two separate Nodes B or RCS were
involved.

9.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 189/25

19. On 7 December 2001 the RegTP found the parties'
framework agreement to be in line with these regulatory
constraints, provided that
respected the
requirements of logically independent control of Nodes B
to
and RNCs. RegTP's approval was
subject
reporting
geographical
concerning
obligations
distribution of shared infrastructure, and the meeting of
their respective 50 % of population coverage obligations.

further
the

the parties

20. Subject to the principle of the primacy of Community law,
the national regulatory framework and the EU competition
rules are of parallel and cumulative application. National
rules may neither conflict with the EU competition rules
nor can compatibility with national rules and regulations
prejudice the outcome of an assessment under the EU
competition rules. Hence a full assessment of the notified
Agreement under the EU competition rules is required.

5. THE AGREEMENT

21. On 20 September 2001,

the parties entered into a
framework agreement setting out the principal terms for
their cooperation on 3G infrastructure. The objectives of
the agreement are to achieve capital expenditure effi-
ciencies and operating expenditure savings;
to expand
geographical coverage while limiting the environmental
impact, and to achieve early deployment of 3G network
infrastructure. Under
framework
the
agreement, the parties will cooperate on the basis of:

terms of

the

(i)

(ii)

extended site sharing: mutual sharing of elements of
the site infrastructure such as mast sites, site support
cabinets (‘SSC’) and power supply, as well as possibly
antennas, combiners and transmission links, within a
geographical area sufficient to enable the parties to
each attain its 50 % population coverage obligation;

radio access network (‘RAN’) sharing: mutual sharing
of Nodes B (i.e. the base stations that receive and send
data across
frequencies and control a particular
network cell) and the radio network controllers
(‘RNCs’), that each control a number of such Nodes
B and that are linked to the core network;

(iii) national roaming:

for the remaining part of the popu-
lation (i.e. over and above each party's respective 50 %
coverage obligations) mutual national roaming on the
proprietary network infrastructure of the other party
that is not subject to site sharing or RAN sharing is
envisaged.

The parties will maintain separate core networks and
service provision, and will not share their frequencies.
The agreement is not exclusive, to the extent that both
parties can agree on extended site-sharing, RAN sharing
and national roaming with third parties (clause 1.3). The
key provisions of the agreement are set out in more detail
below.

5.1. Extended site sharing

22. The parties will each construct

their own proprietary
network infrastructure but will cooperate on the basis of
‘extended site sharing’ within an area which corresponds to
their licence obligations for a population coverage of 50 %
by the end of 2005. Under the agreement,
‘extended site
sharing’ involves sharing Common Site Support Cabinets
(‘SSC’) and power supply and possibly antennas, combiners
and transmission links.

23. The agreement specifies rules for the determination of sites
that may become the subject of sharing arrangements.
Clause 2.1 states that, first, each party will draw up its
own roll-out plans independently; next,
the plans are
divided into planning periods of 18 months showing the
respective areas which T-Mobile and VIAG plan to
develop. The geographical areas that the parties consider
relevant
individual network roll-out, will be
compared periodically and where overlap exists may be
identified as
infrastructure sharing areas. The parties'
respective local branches at technical level will determine
which sites should be subject to extended site sharing
based on maximising cost saving.

their

for

the

control

extended site

24. Clause 3.2 specifically provides that the parties cannot
jointly own or
sharing
elements. However, the party that owns or controls the
particular site-sharing elements must allow their use by the
other party. According to clause 3.3 a bilateral
site
framework agreement that remains to be concluded will
set out the position on common and beneficial use as well
as cost regulation for shared sites.

25. The agreement also contains safeguards in relation to the
exchange of confidential information. Clause 2.6 provides
that only information necessary for the technical real-
isation of extended site sharing can be exchanged. Under
the
particular
commercially sensitive customer information, cannot be
exchanged.

information,

agreement,

other

in

5.2. RAN sharing

26. Section 4 of the agreement deals with cooperation in the
form of RAN sharing. Under the agreement, RAN sharing
can include additional sharing of Common Physical Nodes
B and Common Physical Radio Network Controllers
(‘RNC’) — (to remain within the framework set by
RegTP, Nodes B and RNCs would have to be logically
separate). Clause 4.1 provides that the parties must carry
out a feasibility study into RAN sharing before 30 June
2002. Clause 4.2 states that if RAN sharing is feasible, the
parties will
regulating its
implementation as soon as possible. However, since the
feasibility of RAN sharing has not yet been determined,
the Commission reserves its position on this issue.

into an agreement

enter

C 189/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.8.2002

5.3. National roaming

27. Outside the area required to obtain 50 % population
coverage, no extended site sharing and/or RAN sharing
is proposed.
Instead the parties will build their own
respective 3G infrastructure and any cooperation will be
limited to bulk purchasing of both circuit switched and
package
roaming. VIAG but not
T-Mobile commits to purchasing a minimum volume of
such roaming services from T-Mobile. T-Mobile obtains a
right to purchase roaming services from VIAG under the
same conditions, but it is not under an obligation to do so.

switched national

on their respective interconnection termination prices (13).
Wholesale prices for packet-switched 3G roaming are
based on a retail minus pricing model
taking into
account possible future developments of packet-switched
roaming prices and demand. In addition, the agreement
also provides, as a general principle, that each party has
to ensure that the subscribers of the other party roaming
on its network are treated no less favourably than its own
subscribers (clause 5.3).

the parties

28. Section 5 sets out the key principles on national roaming.
to
that
Clause 5.3 provides
discriminate
international
against other national or
roaming partners. In addition, neither of the parties will
treat the other party's customers less favourably than their
own customers. Clause 5.6 states that the parties undertake
to ensure that
the cooperation on roaming will not
restrain service competition between the parties.

agree not

(Clause 6.5). parties claim that

29. Section 6 deals with national roaming by VIAG customers
on T-Mobil's 3G network. Clause 6.1 provides
that
T-Mobile will provide VIAG with bulk purchasing of
national roaming for the duration of the agreement. As
part of the agreement, VIAG has agreed to purchase a
minimum quantity of roaming services from T-Mobile
within three years from the date of launch of the 3G
roaming services
the
experience with VIAG roaming on T-Mobile's GSM
this is likely to represent a very
network shows that
requirements. Conversely,
small proportion of VIAG's
section 7 deals with national
roaming by T-Mobil's
customers on VIAG's 3G network. Clause 7.1 states that
T-Mobile has the option but not an obligation to purchase
if T-mobile
3G roaming services from VIAG. However,
undertakes to purchase national roaming services from
VIAG,
to the same minimum purchase
subject
requirement as VIAG (clause 7.4).

is

it

30. Section 8 sets out specific rules on barring customer use.
Clause 8.3 states that the party providing national roaming
has the right to bar subscribers of the other party from its
network. Also, the party using national roaming can bar
its own customers from using the other party's service.
This applies in cases where there are overlapping areas.
the
The agreement also provides
location areas for barring and circumstances when the
parties will dispense with barring.

information about

31. Section 10 sets out a two tier system of pricing for 3G
roaming. It provides that prices for circuit-switched 3G
roaming (destined for voice telephony services) are based

32. Section 11 sets out specific rules on the resale of national
roaming capacities to third parties. Clause 11.1.a sets out
the general rule that each party has the right to resell the
roaming capacity of the other party to resellers and service
providers. However, the resale of circuit-switched (voice)
capacity to MVNOs is subject to the approval of the other
party. Clause 11.1.b provides that parties have the right to
make national roaming capacities of the respective other
party available to Mobile Virtual Network Operators
(‘MVNO’) for data traffic (‘data MVNO’) (14), provided that
these MVNOs do not use this capacity for the provision of
services to end customers that are essentially identical to
an end-to-end mobile voice service from a customer's
to stop ‘voice
viewpoint
MVNOs’
Internet Protocol
based on roaming access charged at data rates, and
thereby undercutting the parties in retail markets. The
parties are able to provide roaming capacity for voice
this is
traffic to ‘data MVNOs’ acting as resellers, but
likely to be charged at a different (higher) rate. Clause
11.1.b is subject to review at the end of 2003.

(‘voice MVNO’). This aims

from providing voice over

33. In addition, clause 11.1.c provides that

the resale of
roaming capacity to other licensed network operators or
to ‘voice MVNOs’ as defined in clause 11.1.b is subject to
consent by the other party. However, pursuant to clause
11.2, the prior consent requirement of clause 11.1.c does
not apply if the MVNOs are group companies, provided
they respect the different pricing regimes for voice and
data services. In addition, pursuant to clause 11.3, once
a party itself offers roaming to a third party (not a group
company)
is a ‘voice MVNO’ and offers services
essentially identical to an end-to-end mobile voice service
from a customer's viewpoint in the sense of clause 11.1.b,
this party is obliged to allow the other party to provide
their received national roaming capacities to such ‘voice
MVNOs’ as well.

that

(13) Circuit switching is a transmission technique that is based on a
continuous stream of data over a permanent connection between
the points of origination and destination for the duration of a call.
Packet switching is a more efficient transmission technique based
on the division of the information transmitted into packets that are
sent separately, using the network only when there is data to be
sent.

(14) MVNOs are undertakings with an own mobile network code and
an own range of mobile IMSI numbers or an equivalent for 3G,
but that do not own a licence to operate wireless frequencies.

9.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 189/27

5.4. Duration

34. The agreement will continue in force until 31 December
2011, after which date it will be automatically renewed for
a period of two years unless either party with two years
prior notice terminates it.

6. ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES

in financial

35. The parties primarily explain the need for their agreement
on 3G network sharing
terms. More
specifically they claim that network sharing is necessary:
(1)
first, because 3G network infrastructure is more
expensive than its predecessors, given the much higher
antenna density required, namely twice as high as 2G
GSM networks;
(2) second, as since 3G licences were
awarded the expectations of 3G services revenue have
been revised downward; and (3) third, because due to
the general downturn of the mobile telecommunications
industry their cost of raising capital has increased. As a
result of the agreement, the parties envisage a reduction of
up to 30 % of their investments in network infrastructure
with further savings on network operating costs.

as

the object or

36. Article 81(1): The parties argue the agreement does not
have
effect of appreciably restricting
competition within the common market contrary to
and
their prospective
Article 81(1)
possible RAN-sharing will not result
in the sharing of
core networks, and because the agreement requires the
parties to maintain full competition at the service and
retail
In addition, network planning, design and
operations will remain independent and any disclosure of
technical
information will be limited to the minimum
necessary.

site-sharing

level.

this

to the parties,

costs. According

their investments in network infrastructure and network
operating
is
necessary as
infrastructure sharing will help alleviate
some of the burden of the simultaneous opening of 3G
market access in the EU. Further, the parties argue that the
approach adopted is in line with the policy adopted by
RegTP, the German NRA, as well as by other NRAs such
as Oftel in the UK. In addition, infrastructure sharing is
required due to planning restrictions and to meet environ-
mental concerns.

38. The parties argue that consumers will ultimately benefit
through the delivery of
faster, more innovative 3G
services at lower prices. Finally they state that competition
will not only be preserved but will be increased in the
markets for 3G networks and services in Germany as the
agreement will enable earlier and more complete network
roll out, resulting in greater competition.

7. CONCLUSION

39. The Commission intends to take a favourable view in
respect of the notified agreement. Before doing so, the
Commission invites
their
comments within one month of the publication of this
notice,
fax number given below,
quoting the reference Case COMP/N.38.369 — Rahmen-
vertrag T-Mobil Deutschland/VIAG Interkom (notification).

to the address or

submit

parties

third

to

European Commission
Directorate-General for Competition
Directorate C
B-1049 Brussels
Fax (32-2) 296 70 81
E-mail: wolf.sauter@cec.eu.int.

If

the agreement

37. Article 81(3): The main potential restriction of competition
concerns the limitations on resale of capacity to ‘data
MVNOs’.
considered to restrict
competition, the parties argue in the alternative, that it
is exemptable under Article 81(3). In view of the large
licence costs incurred followed by a significant decrease
in the commercial value of 3G spectrum the parties
argue that
infrastructure sharing will enable them to
reduce capital and operating expenditure by reducing

is

it must

40. If a party submitting comments considers that

these
indicate the passages
contain business secrets,
which,
in its opinion, ought not to be disclosed on the
grounds that they contain business secrets or other confi-
dential material, and state the reasons. If the Commission
does not receive a request with reasons, it will assume that
the
confidential
information.

comments

contain

any

not

do