Sixth Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the application of Directive 89/552/EEC “Television without Frontiers”
Date: 2007-10-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, audiovisual communications policy, broadcasting, report, television

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 24.10.2007 
COM(2007) 452 final 

SIXTH REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 
THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

on the application of Directive 89/552/EEC “Television without Frontiers” 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
SIXTH REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 
THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

on the application of Directive 89/552/EEC “Television without Frontiers” 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.3. 

2.4. 

2.5. 

2.6. 

3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

5. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Background of this Report ........................................................................................... 3 

Development of the television market in Europe......................................................... 3 

Application of the Directive......................................................................................... 4 

Jurisdiction (Article 2) ................................................................................................. 4 

Events of major importance for society (Article 3a).................................................... 5 

Promotion of the distribution and production of television programmes (Articles 4 
and 5)............................................................................................................................ 6 

The application of the rules on advertising (Articles 10 to 20).................................... 6 

Protection of minors and public order (Articles 2a, 22 and 22a) ................................. 7 

Coordination between national authorities and the Commission................................. 8 

Proposal for an Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMS)................................ 8 

International aspects..................................................................................................... 9 

Enlargement – prospects .............................................................................................. 9 

International framework for cultural diversity............................................................. 9 

Cooperation with the Council of Europe ................................................................... 10 

Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 10 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1. 

Background of this Report 

By means of this Communication and in accordance with Article 26 of Directive 
89/552/EEC1,  as  amended  by  Directive  97/36/EC2  (the  Television  without 
Frontiers  Directive,  referred  to  below  as  ‘the  Directive’),  the  Commission  is 
submitting the sixth application report to the European Parliament, the Council 
and the Economic and Social Committee. The report deals with the application 
of the Directive during the period 2005-2006. 

The  main  objective  of  this  report  is  to  describe  and  analyse  the  salient  facts 
relating  to  the  application  of  the  Directive  during  the  reference  period3.  Given 
that  the  Commission  has  adopted  a  proposal  for  the  modernisation  of  the 
Directive,  this  report  will  also  refer  to  recent  developments  concerning  this 
legislative  proposal,  which  is  currently  being  examined  by  the  Council  and 
Parliament under the co-decision procedure4. 

1.2. 

Development of the television market in Europe 

In recent years, the television market has faced important challenges of both an 
economic  and  technological  nature.  Against  a  background  of  revenue  stability 
for the traditional financial streams such as licence fees and advertising, further 
diversification  of  revenue  sources  linked  to  a  multiplication  of  services  has 
allowed the broadcasting sector to improve its overall economic performance in 
terms  of  turnover  (the  total  net  revenues  of  radio/TV  companies  in  2004  were 
about  €72.8  billion,  an  increase  of  7.9%  compared  with  20035).  However,  this 
trend  has  not  prevented  a  concentration  of  operators  in  specific  areas,  such  as 
Pay-TV,  where  business  conditions  have  in  many  cases  not  allowed  the 
simultaneous presence of several operators on individual national markets. 

The development of digital television broadcasting and, more recently, of IPTV 
and other forms of online content, has introduced a further element of change in 
the broadcasting industry, which is now able to multiply its range of services to 
an  extent  unknown  up  until  now.  These  technological  developments  will 
certainly continue to influence the sector in the years to come,  with increasing 
competition  within  the  sector  as  well  as  from  new  entrants.  However,  it  is  not 
possible to predict at present which business model will benefit the most from 
the  changing  technological  conditions.  In  any  case,  the  Commission  has  set 
2012 as an indicative target for analogue switch-off6.  

1 
2 
3 
4 

5 
6 

OJ L 298, 17.10.1989. p. 23 
OJ L 202, 30.7.1997. p. 60 
It follows the fifth application report (COM(2006) 49 final). 
For more information on the modernisation of the Directive, see: 
http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/proposal_2005/index_en.htm. 
European Audiovisual Observatory, Yearbook 2006. 
Communication of 24 May 2005, COM(2005) 204 final. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
The number of services available in the enlarged Community as at mid-2006 has 
surpassed earlier predictions. In addition to 122 analogue nationwide channels, 
some  1335  digital  channels  were  available  over  multiple  platforms  (cable, 
satellite, terrestrial, IPTV)7. A number of these channels targeted the market of 
another Member State or were based outside the Union. In mid-2006 there were 
370  such  services8.  In  addition  to  channels  available  nationally  or  trans-
nationally, the number of regional channels is estimated at around 30009. 

Confronted  with  such  an  increased  and  diversified  offer,  viewers  have  not 
substantially  modified  their  overall  viewing  patterns.  Clearly,  audiences  have 
fragmented  more  as  viewers  have  to  a  certain  extent  switched  to  new  digital 
channels.  However,  the  long-predicted  decrease  in  the  time  spent  watching 
television  in  favour  of  Internet  consumption  has  not  materialised.  In  certain 
countries  viewing  time  increased  in  2005  compared  with  2004  (Belgium, 
France,  Ireland,  Poland).  Hungary  remains  the  country  where  audience  levels 
are  the  highest  (265  minutes/day),  while  Denmark  is  where  viewers  spend  the 
least time watching TV (153 minutes/day). 

2. 

APPLICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 

2.1. 

Jurisdiction (Article 2) 

The country of origin principle is the cornerstone of the Directive. According to 
that  principle,  services  that  comply  with  the  law  of  the  country  where  their 
providers  are  established  may  circulate  freely  within  the  Community  internal 
market.  However,  Article  2a(2)  of  the  Directive  allows  for  Member  States  to 
derogate  from  Article  2a(1)  where  a  television  broadcast  coming  from  another 
Member State manifestly, seriously and gravely infringes Article 22(1) or (2) or 
Article 22a. 

Making  use  of  this  provision,  the  United  Kingdom  (UK)  government  notified 
the  Commission  that  it  intended  to  proscribe  the  television  service  known  as 
“Extasi  TV”  on  20  December  2004.  The  reason  given  was  that  this  television 
service  had  manifestly,  seriously  and  gravely  infringed  Article  22  of  the 
Directive. The service was broadcast via satellite uplinking facilities situated in 
Spain,  but  the  programming  itself  was  assembled  and  edited  by  Digital  World 
Television (DWT), established in Italy. There was thus uncertainty as to which 
Member State — Italy or Spain — had jurisdiction over this broadcaster. 

The  UK  complied  with  all  consultation  requirements  and  the  infringements 
persisted. By letter of 9 February 2005, the UK notified the Commission that an 
order had been made pursuant to Section 177 of the Broadcasting Act 1990, the 
effect of which was to make illegal certain acts that are necessary for effective 
reception  of  the  service  in  question  in  the  UK.  On  11  July  2005,  the 

7 
8 
9 

European Audiovisual Observatory, Yearbook 2006. 
European Audiovisual Observatory, Yearbook 2006. 
European Audiovisual Observatory, Yearbook 2006. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Commission  decided  that  the  UK  measures  were  compatible  with  Community 
law, in accordance with Article 2a(2) of the Directive10.  

Problems  likewise  arose  in  deciding  the  relevant  jurisdiction  for  the  services 
RTL-TVi,  Club  RTL  and  “Plug  TV”,  specifically  whether  Belgium  or 
Luxembourg  was  competent.  At  the  meeting  of  the  Contact  Committee  on  15 
November 2006, the Belgian delegation presented its submission concerning the 
issue. A discussion followed with other interested delegations. The delegations 
agreed to cooperate better in order to find concrete solutions to such problems11.  

2.2. 

Events of major importance for society (Article 3a) 

Article 3a(1) of the Directive provides that Member States may take measures to 
ensure  that  events  regarded  as  being  of  major  importance  for  society  are  not 
broadcast in such a way that would deprive a significant part of the public of the 
possibility of following such events on free-to-air television. Under Article 3a(2) 
of the Directive, the Commission must verify that such measures are compatible 
with Community law (once notified to it), and publishes the measures once they 
have effectively been taken by Member States. 

On  15  December  2005,  in  the  case  Infront  v  Commission,12  the  Court  of  First 
Instance ruled that the letter of the Director-General for Education and Culture 
informing  the  UK  authorities  that  the  Commission  had  no  objections  to  the 
measures  relating  to  television  coverage  of  events  of  major  importance  in  that 
country  constituted  a  decision  within  the  meaning  of  Article  249  EC.  On  this 
basis,  the  Court  annulled  this  decision  on  procedural  grounds  since  it  was  not 
adopted  in  conformity  with  the  Commission’s  rules  on  collegiate  procedure, 
delegation and enforcement of decisions. 

Following  this  judgement,  the  Commission  has  adopted  a  new  decision  on  the 
UK  measures  in  conformity  with  its  rules  on  collegiate  procedure,  delegation 
and  enforcement  of  decisions.  The  Commission  has  also  brought  all  its 
verifications  of  Member  State  measures  notified  before  the  Infront  judgment 
into line with the findings of the Court and adopted Commission decisions to be 
published,  together  with  the  national  measures,  in  the  Official  Journal,  in 
accordance with Article 3a(2) of the Directive13. 

Further, the Commission will act in accordance with the findings of the Court in 
respect  of  all  Member  State  measures  notified  to  the  Commission  after  the 
Infront judgement. This has been done in respect of the draft measures notified 
by  Finland  to  the  Commission  on  2  October  2006.  These  measures  have  been 
undergoing  verification  by  the  Commission  following  a  favourable  opinion  of 
the  Contact  Committee.  As  previously  indicated,  a  formal  decision  on  the 

10 
11 
12 
13 

C(2005) 2335 final. 
See paragraph 2.6 hereunder 
Case T-33/01, European Court reports 2005 page II-05897. 
Decisions of 25 June 2007, unpublished yet. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
compatibility of these measures with Community law has been adopted and will 
be published, together with the measures adopted at national level14. 

2.3. 

Promotion  of  the  distribution  and  production  of  television  programmes 
(Articles 4 and 5) 

On  22  August  2006,  the  Commission  adopted  the  Seventh  Communication  on 
the application of Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive. The report covers the EU-25 
over the reference period 2003-200415.  

The average broadcasting time for European works in the EU-25 was 65.18% in 
2003  and  63.32%  in  2004,  representing  a  decrease  of  3.63%  over  four  years 
(2001-2004). Taken over six years (1999-2004), however, there was an overall 
increase of 2.64% in the scheduling of European works. Two factors have to be 
taken  into  account  when  evaluating  progress  under  Article  4  of  the  Directive. 
First, the figures for 2004 include the ten Member States that joined the EU in 
2004. Second, the method of calculation has changed, since secondary channels 
with audience shares below 3% are now also included in calculating the average 
proportions  of  European  works.  The  results  show  that,  notwithstanding  the 
slightly  downward  short-term  trend,  the  scheduling  of  European  works  has 
stabilised in the EU at a level well above 60% of total qualifying transmission 
time. Particularly for the ten Member States that participated in this monitoring 
exercise for the first time, this is an encouraging development. It is also worth 
noting that the compliance rate for the EU as a whole rose by more than 4 points 
during  this  reference  period.  Thus,  overall  the  application  of  Article  4  of  the 
Directive at European level has been satisfactory.  

The share of European works by independent producers within the EU-25 was 
31.39  %  in  2003  and  31.50%  in  2004.  It  is  noticeable  that  there  is  hardly  any 
difference here between the channels in the EU-15 and those of the ten Member 
States  that  joined  the  EU  in  2004,  which  achieved  an  average  performance  of 
31.55% even higher than the EU-15 channels (31.47%). Overall, compared with 
the  previous  reference  periods,  there  was  a  decrease  of  6.25%  over  six 
consecutive  years  (1999-2004).  However,  the  level  of  transmission  of  recent 
European  works  by  independent  producers  remains  relatively  high  (above  one 
fifth of the total qualifying transmission time). The share of European works by 
independent  producers  is  well  above  the  10%  target  set  in  Article  5  of  the 
Directive.  

2.4. 

The application of the rules on advertising (Articles 10 to 20) 

During  the  reference  period  the  Commission  pursued  infringement  procedures 
particularly  in  connection  with  breaches  of  the  advertising  rules.  These  were 
identified  following  citizens’  complaints  or  on  the  basis  of  monitoring  by  an 
independent  consultant.  This  independent  consultant  supplied  national  reports 

14 

15 

The  Finnish  government  eventually  adopted  its  measures  on  22  February  2007.  They  were 
notified to the Commission on 26 March 2007. 
The  European  Commission  is  now  preparing  the  Eighth  Communication  on  the  application  of 
Articles 4 and 5 for the period 2005-2006. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
containing relevant facts and evidence relating to the concrete application of the 
quantitative  rules  on  television  advertising  by  broadcasters  of  certain  Member 
States  over  a  particular  period  of  time.  In  2006,  the  situation  in  five  Member 
States  was  examined  and  corresponding  reports  were  duly  delivered  to  the 
Commission, which will provide for appropriate follow-up. 

Further to its reasoned opinion sent to the Kingdom of Belgium in 2004 on the 
basis  of  a  monitoring  report  provided  by  the  independent  consultant,  the 
Commission  had  in-depth  discussions  with  the  Belgian  authorities.  In  view  of 
the  improvements  achieved  in  the  meantime  by  the  regulatory  bodies  in  their 
monitoring of broadcasters’ activities under their responsibility, the Commission 
decided to close the case on 4 April 200616. A letter of formal notice was sent to 
Italy in view of the introduction of short advertising spots, usually called mini-
spots,  during  the  retransmission  of  football  matches,  which  were  deemed  to 
contravene the rules of the Directive. This case — brought on account of non-
compliance  with  the  rules  of  the  Directive  —  was  eventually  closed  by  the 
Commission  on  12  December  2006  following  changes  in  Italian  legislation  on 
TV advertising 17. 

2.5. 

Protection of minors and public order (Articles 2a, 22 and 22a) 

In 2004, the Commission informed the Asociación Nacional para la Protección 
y el Bienestar de los Animales (ANPBA) that it would refuse the request by this 
association  to  prohibit  the  broadcasting  of  bull  fights  by  Spanish  broadcasters, 
taking  into  account  the  absence  of  any  complaint  from  Member  States  where 
such  programmes  are  received,  indicating  their  intention  to  derogate  from  the 
principle  of  freedom  of  reception  contained  in  Article  2a(2)  of  the  Directive. 
Following  this  letter,  the  ANPBA  filed  a  complaint  with  the  ombudsman. 
Following  examination  of 
trace  of 
maladministration  by  the  Commission  when  dealing  with  the  complaint  and 
closed the case accordingly by decision of 12 January 200618. In the meantime 
the Commission had closed the case19. 

found  no 

the  case, 

latter 

the 

On  20  December  2006  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  adopted  a 
Recommendation  on  the  Protection  of  Minors  and  Human  Dignity  and  on  the 
Right  of  Reply.  The  Recommendation  builds  upon  the  earlier  1998  Council 
Recommendation,  which  will  remain  in  force.  It  extends  the  scope  to  include 
media  literacy,  the  cooperation  and  sharing  of  experience  and  good  practices 
between  (self-  and  co-)regulatory  bodies,  action  against  discrimination  in  all 

16 

17 

18 

19 

Most  of  the  breaches  of  the  Directive  identified  in  the  monitoring  report  were  by  broadcasters 
established in Flanders. Since then, substantial progress has been noted in the supervision of the 
broadcasters  and  the  way  in  which  they  implement  the  rules  laid  down  in  the  Flemish  Media 
Decree. Further, the Flemish media regulator (Vlaamse Regulator voor de Media) was established 
on  10  February  2006  by  the  Flemish  Government,  with  more  powers  than  the  former 
Commissariaat van de Media. 
See  in  particular  amendments  made  to  Article  4  of  delibera  Nr.  538/01/CSP  by  delibera 
250/04/CSP. 
Complaint  3133/2004  JMA  against 
http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/decision/en/043133.htm. 
The decision was taken on 12 October 2005. 

the  European  Commission,  decision  published 

in: 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
media,  and  the  right  of  reply  concerning  online  media.  The  Commission  will 
deliver  regular  reports  on  the  implementation  and  effectiveness  of  this 
Recommendation, and review it if necessary. 

2.6. 

Coordination between national authorities and the Commission 

Meetings of the Contact Committee took place on 6 April 2005 [22nd meeting], 
14  October  2005  [23rd  meeting]  and  15  November  2006  [24th  meeting].  In  its 
21st meeting on 21 October, the Contact Committee decided to make its minutes 
publicly available, in order to increase transparency. They are now posted on the 
Commission’s website.20 

The  Committee  followed  the  preparations  of  the  review  of  the  Television 
without Frontiers Directive, dealt with jurisdiction issues on multiple occasions 
and in general followed issues relating to the application of the Directive. In the 
context of  the  24th  meeting,  the  Luxembourg  and  Belgian  delegations  declared 
their willingness to find a solution that would guarantee respect by the company, 
CLT,  of  the  commitments  regarding  audiovisual  productions  under  the 
regulations of the French Community of Belgium. During the same meeting, the 
Committee gave a favourable opinion on the Finnish measures under Article 3a 
TVWF (major events). 

Further  to  the  meeting  in  March  2005  on  the  issue  of  incitement  to  hatred  in 
broadcasts  from  outside  the  European  Union,  such  as  Al  Manar  or  Sahar  1, 
Commissioner Reding convened the High Level Group of National Regulatory 
Authorities for an annual meeting in March 2006. Several issues were discussed, 
in  particular  the  follow-up  to  some  of  the  commitments  undertaken  in  March 
2005  to  safeguard  the  fundamental  freedoms  enshrined  in  the  Charter  of 
Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the European Convention for 
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 

3. 

PROPOSAL FOR AN AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA SERVICES DIRECTIVE (AVMS) 

A  legislative  proposal  for  a  modernised  audiovisual  services  directive  was 
adopted in December 200521. The adoption followed two public consultations in 
2003 and 2005 and a stakeholder conference in September 2006 in Liverpool.22 

The  legislative  proposal  is  now  in  the  co-decision  procedure  with  Parliament 
and Council. After a first discussion in May 2006 on the Commission proposal, 
the Council agreed a general approach on 13 November 2006 under the Finnish 
Presidency. 

20 
21 
22 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/contact_comm/index_en.htm. 
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/proposal_2005/index_en.htm. 
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/index_en.htm. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  its  first  reading  on  13  December  2006,  Parliament  largely  confirmed  the 
Commission’s proposal with a clear consensus on scope, co- and self-regulation, 
European works and the two-tier approach. The amendments adopted are largely 
consistent  with  the  Council’s  general  approach23.  The  Commission  adopted  its 
amended  proposal  on  29  March  2007.  A  political  agreement  on  a  Common 
Position was adopted on 24 May 2007 under the German Presidency24. 

4. 

INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS 

4.1. 

Enlargement – prospects 

accession  of  Romania 

The EU grew from 25 to 27 members during the period under review, following 
the 
January  2007. 
Relations  between  the  Union  and  the  (then)  candidate  countries  developed  in 
accordance  with  the  pre-accession  strategies.  The  Commission  monitored  the 
process, paying particular attention to the development of the administrative and 
judicial capabilities necessary to implement the Directive. 

and  Bulgaria  on  1 

Croatia,  Turkey  and  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  are  now 
candidate  countries.  The  EU  officially  launched  accession  negotiations  with 
Croatia and Turkey on 3 October 2005. Negotiations with the Former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia have not yet started.  

As regards the Western Balkan countries, the European Council has underlined 
their  prospects  of  EU  membership  on  several  occasions.  The  Commission  is 
pursuing  a  strategy  for  the  convergence  of  the  audiovisual  policies  of  these 
countries  with  European  media  standards,  in  cooperation  with  the  Council  of 
Europe. 

4.2. 

International framework for cultural diversity   

During the reporting period, important steps to underpin the common objectives 
of  European  audiovisual  policy  were  taken  with  the  affirmation  of  cultural 
diversity at international level. 

On  18  December  2006,  the  Community  ratified  the  Convention  on  the 
protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions, adopted by the 
UNESCO  General  Conference  on  20  October  2005,  thus  making  a  decisive 
contribution to the rapid entry into force of the Convention (3 months after the 
deposit of the 30th instrument of ratification, i.e. on 18 March 2007) and to the 
launching of the implementation process.  

23 

24 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2006-
0559+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN. 
For more information see: 
http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/proposal_2005/index_en.htm 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
Furthermore, the EU concluded a series of negotiations with 17 members of the 
World Trade Organisation (WTO) on the modifications of trade commitments in 
services under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) further to 
the accession to the EU of 13 Member States since 1995, in order to align such 
commitments to those of the EC-12, and consolidate them into a single EC-wide 
Schedule  of  trade  commitments  (EC25  consolidated  GATS  Schedule  of 
commitments). The result of these negotiations represents a positive outcome for 
cultural diversity in that the audiovisual sector now enjoys the same guarantees 
across  the  enlarged  EU  under  the  GATS  (i.e.  absence  of  market  access  and 
national  treatment  commitments),  it  is  now  clarified  explicitly  for  the  25 
Member States that the provision of content is excluded from the commitments 
on  telecommunications  services  and  safeguards  are  secured  regarding  the 
exclusion of audiovisual services enabled by computer and related services from 
the commitments in the computer services area. 

4.3. 

Cooperation with the Council of Europe 

The Commission attends meetings of the Steering Committee on the Media and 
New  Communication  Services  (CDMC)  as  an  observer  delegate.  The  CDMC 
steers the work of all expert groups and subordinate bodies dealing with media 
and communications issues. The most pertinent of these bodies is the Standing 
Committee  on  Transfrontier  Television,  which  monitors  the  implementation  of 
the Council of Europe Convention on Transfrontier Television. This committee, 
in  the  presence  of  a  Commission  observer,  recently  launched  the  preparatory 
work for a review of the Convention. It was decided to maintain the consistency 
that both institutions have fostered over many years between both instruments. 

The  European  Commission  also  launched  an  initiative  to  raise  the  level  of 
information  on  European  audiovisual  regulatory  standards  in  the  Western 
Balkans region and to support policy reform in collaboration with the Council of 
Europe. A series of seminars were held in the Western Balkans and Brussels to 
allow  an  exchange  of  information  on  European  regulatory  standards  and  the 
state-of-play on media policy in each of the Western Balkan countries. The main 
achievements  of  this  initiative  were  strengthened  regional  cooperation  and 
increased  awareness  of  European  standards  for  media  freedoms  and  the  EU 
audiovisual acquis25.  

5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The  Directive  continues  to  function  effectively  as  a  means  of  ensuring  the 
freedom to provide television services in the European Union. The Commission 
—  acting  as  guardian  of  the  Treaty  —  continues  to  verify  the  effective 
implementation of the Directive and takes action where necessary to ensure it. 
The  seventh  report  on  the  application  of  Articles  4  and  5  of  the  Directive 
indicates  generally  satisfactory  results  in  terms  of  channels  meeting  the 
requirements  for  European  works.  At  the  same  time,  technological  and  market 

25 

http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/ext/enlargement/index_en.htm 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
developments that have opened the way to the development of new audiovisual 
services — for example on-demand services — confirm the need to modernise 
the  EU  legal  framework.  This  will  be  done  once  the  amending  Directive  on 
audiovisual media services is finally adopted. 

EN 

11 

   EN