natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
During that period Mabb provided them with a grant of EUR 65000 each. If the broadcasting costs of the network operator and thus the costs payable by the broadcasters to the operator fall, the amount of funding is reduced accordingly.
Med tem časom je Mabb vsakemu izmed izdajateljem dodelil pomoč v višini 65000 EUR. Če se stroški oddajanja omrežnega operaterja in s tem zneski, ki jih morajo izdajatelji televizijskega programa plačati omrežnemu operaterju, zmanjšajo, se ustrezno zmanjša tudi znesek pomoči.
There is no provision for the grant to be increased.
Zvišanje pomoči ni predvideno.
Following a second invitation to tender by Mabb on 16 April 2004, the DVB-T broadcasting licences and the public funding have been extended to five years.
Po drugem javnem razpisu za programska mesta s strani Mabb-a dne 16. aprila 2004 so bile licence za oddajanje DVB-T in pomoč podaljšani na dobo pet let.
In its response to the decision to initiate the procedure, Germany stated that the programme channels of the abovementioned commercial broadcasters were currently receiving annual funding of some EUR 60000 each. In the case of RTL Group and ProSiebenSat.1, this represents total public funding per year of some EUR 240000 per group.
V svojem odgovoru na odločbo o sprožitvi postopka je zvezna vlada navedla, da letna pomoč za programska mesta za vsakega izmed omenjenih izdajateljev televizijskega programa trenutno znaša okoli 60000 EUR. V primeru obeh skupin za radiodifuzijo RTL in ProSiebenSat.1 znaša skupna pomoč 240000 EUR letno na skupino.
In response to a subsequent request for information, Germany has corrected this information.
V odgovoru na naknadno zahtevo po informacijah je zvezna vlada te podatke popravila.
The public funding corresponds in fact to the amounts specified in the Agreements with the individual broadcasters.
Javno financiranje se dejansko ujema z zneski, razvidnimi iz pogodb, sklenjenih s posameznimi izdajatelji televizijskega programa.
In 2004, the first full year of funding, Mabb provided the following amounts: EUR 330000 for ProSiebenSat.1, EUR 265000 for RTL Group, EUR 68167 each for FAB and BBC World, and EUR 65000 each for DSF, Eurosport and Viva Plus. On the basis of this information, the total amount of Mabb's funding for commercial broadcasters comes to some EUR 4 million. To date, Mabb has already granted about half of this amount.
Mabb je v prvem polnem letu pomoči, leta 2004, zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa dodelil naslednje zneske: Skupini ProSiebenSat.1330000 EUR, Skupini RTL 265000 EUR, FAB in BBC World po 68167 EUR ter DSF, Eurosportu in Viva Plus po 65000 EUR. Na podlagi teh podatkov znaša skupni znesek pomoči, ki ga je Mabb namenil zasebnim televizijskim postajam, okoli 4 mio EUR. Do zdaj je Mabb že izplačal približno polovico tega zneska.
As can be seen from the Agreements between Mabb and the individual broadcasters, the latter pay a fee to the network operator for the broadcasting of their programme channels over the DVB-T network.
Kot je razvidno iz sporazumov med Mabb in posameznimi televizijskimi postajami, postaje omrežnemu operaterju za prenos svojih programov v omrežju DVB-T plačujejo določen znesek.
According to the original invitations to tender (A.6) for the programme channels launched by Mabb, these fees were supposed to be regulated by RegTP [37].
V skladu s prvotnim javnim razpisom (A.6) Mabb-a za programska mesta ta plačila ureja RegTP [37].
In accordance with the Federal Telecommunications Law (‘TKG’) of 22 June 2004, the network operator must, however, be found to possess significant market power before measures regulating the fee payable can be imposed by RegTP (Sections 10 to 13 TKG).
V skladu z nemškim zakonom o telekomunikacijah (v nadaljevanju TKG) z dne 22. junija 2004 je potrebno ugotoviti, ali ima omrežni operater pomembno tržno moč, preden lahko RegTP naloži ukrepe za urejanje plačila (členi 10–13 TKG).
As far as the DVB-T network is concerned, RegTP has not yet, however, defined the relevant markets, with the result that the existence of significant market power, which is necessary for the fees to be regulated, has still not been established.
Glede omrežja DVB-T pa RegTP do zdaj še ni opredelil ustreznih trgov in zato pomembna tržna moč, potrebna za urejanje plačil, še ni bila določena.
If the existence of significant market power on the part of a network operator is established in accordance with Sections 30 to 33 TKG, the fees would have to be regulated according to the principle of the costs of efficient service provision.
Ureditev plačil bi morala pri veliki tržni moči omrežnega operaterja v skladu s členi 30–33 TKG slediti načelu upoštevanja stroškov učinkovitega zagotavljanja storitev.
T-Systems has maintained that it applies this principle to the fees it sets even though there is as yet no legal obligation to do so.
T-Systems je navedel, da je njegovo oblikovanje cen podvrženo temu načelu, čeprav to še ni zakonsko obvezno.
Mabb finances the grants towards commercial broadcasters’ transmission costs from its own budget, which essentially receives 2 % of the licence fee income accruing to Berlin and Brandenburg (in accordance with Section 40 of the State Broadcasting Treaty and Section 15 of the State Media Treaty).
Mabb pomoč za stroške oddajanja zasebnim televizijskim postajam financira iz svojega proračuna. Proračun Mabb-a se v veliki meri financira iz deleža v višini dveh odstotkov prihodkov iz RTV-naročnine na območju Berlina in Brandenburga (v skladu s členom 40 državne pogodbe o radiodifuziji in s členom 15 državne pogodbe o medijih).
Mabb grants the funding described above only to the commercial broadcasters.
Mabb dodeljuje opisano pomoč le zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa.
The PSBs finance the costs of DVB-T transmission out of the licence fee income accruing to them.
Javnopravne televizijske ustanove financirajo stroške prenosa DVB-T iz svojih prihodkov iz naslova naročnine.
According to KEF reports, ARD paid a total of EUR 43,9 million country-wide for DVB-T in the period 2001-04, the corresponding figure for ZDF being EUR 35,6 million [38].
Po poročilih KEF je ARD v obdobju med 2001 in 2004 za DVB-T po vsej državi skupaj porabil 43,9 mio. EUR, ZDF pa skupaj 35,6 mio.
The KEF reports do not provide any regional breakdown.
EUR [38]. Poročila KEF ne ponujajo regionalne razdelitve.
It must, however, be assumed that a substantial amount of these resources have been available for DVB-T transmission in Berlin-Brandenburg since this was the first and the longest-running DVB-T project in Germany during the period concerned.
Treba pa je izhajati iz dejstva, da je bil velik delež teh sredstev namenjen prenosu DVB-T v Berlin-Brandenburgu, saj je bil v tistem času to prvi in najdlje trajajoči projekt DVB-T v Nemčiji.
The launch of DVB-T transmission in Berlin-Brandenburg on 1 November 2002 was followed by the launch in North Rhine-Westphalia (but not until 24 May 2004) and then in the Rhine-Maine area and in Northern Germany in the second half of 2004.
Začetku prenosa DVB-T v Berlin-Brandenburgu 1. novembra 2002 so sledili začetki prenosa v Severnem Porenju-Vestfaliji (šele 24. maja 2004) ter v drugi polovici leta 2004 na območju Ren/Majna in v severni Nemčiji.
REASONS FOR INITIATING THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE
RAZLOGI ZA SPROŽITEV FORMALNEGA POSTOPKA PREISKAVE
In the decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission noted first that the measure described seemed to meet all the criteria of Article 87(1) and could, therefore, be regarded as State Aid.
V svoji odločbi o sprožitvi postopka je Komisija najprej navedla, da opisani ukrep očitno izpolnjuje vsa merila iz člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES in ga je zato mogoče opredeliti kot državno pomoč.
In particular, it differentiated between two types of potential beneficiary, namely the commercial broadcasters as direct beneficiaries and the network operator T-Systems as the indirect beneficiary.
Komisija je razlikovala predvsem med dvema vrstama možnih upravičencev, zasebnimi televizijskimi postajami kot neposrednimi upravičenci in omrežnim operaterjem T-Systems kot posrednim upravičencem.
The Commission also expressed doubts as to the compatibility of the aid with the EC Treaty.
Komisija je izrazila tudi dvom glede združljivosti pomoči s Pogodbo ES.
Neither the derogations from the general prohibition on Aid listed in Article 87(2) nor the derogation in Article 87(3)(c) seemed to be met.
Očitno niso bile izpolnjene niti izjeme od splošne prepovedi pomoči po členu 87(2) niti izjeme po členu 87(3)(c) Pogodbe ES.
What was particularly problematic according to the Commission was the fact that the aid appeared to infringe the requirement of technological neutrality.
Kot posebej problematično je Komisija izpostavila dejstvo, da naj bi pomoč kršila zapoved tehnološke nevtralnosti.
In addition, the Commission wondered whether the aid could be regarded as compensation for a service of general economic interest.
Nadalje je Komisija postavila vprašanje, ali je pomoč mogoče označiti kot odškodnino za storitev splošnega gospodarskega interesa.
Lastly, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure in order to give Germany and interested parties the opportunity to submit their comments on its provisional assessment of the measure described and to make available to the Commission any relevant information.
Komisija je sprožila formalni postopek preiskave, da bi Nemčiji in zainteresiranim strankam omogočila, da predložijo svoje pripombe glede začasne ocene Komisije v zvezi z opisanim ukrepom in da Komisiji predložijo ustrezne informacije.
NSAB submitted two sets of comments in which it generally supported the views expressed by the Commission in the decision to initiate the procedure.
NSAB je predložil dve pripombi, s katerima je v splošnem podprl ocene, ki jih je Komisija zapisala v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka.
In practice, it took the view that the measure constituted State Aid for which, moreover, no exemption could be claimed.
NSAB se pridružuje mnenju, da ukrep predstavlja državno pomoč, za katero ni mogoče uveljavljati nobene izjeme od pravil.
In particular, it stressed the non-technologically neutral nature of the measure and the adverse competitive effects of the indirect funding for T-Systems on operators of cable and satellite networks.
NSAB posebej poudarja značaj ukrepa, ki ni tehnološko nevtralen, kot tudi negativne konkurenčne vplive na operaterje kabelskih in satelitskih omrežij, ki jih je povzročilo posredno financiranje T-Systems.
ProSiebenSat.1 stressed the importance of the funding, from a commercial viewpoint, for the success of the digital switch-over.
Stališče ProSiebenSat.1 poudarja pomen pomoči za uspeh digitalnega prehoda z vidika podjetja.
Without any assistance, it would have considered switching off terrestrial transmission in Berlin-Brandenburg without any replacement.
Brez pomoči bi ProSiebenSat.1 ukinil prizemni prenos v Berlin-Brandenburgu brez nadomestila.
There was also the risk with the switch-over that terrestrial coverage would suddenly cease, with the financing of commercial broadcasters out of advertising revenue being adversely affected.
Poleg tega je prehod spremljalo tveganje, da bi se prizemni doseg zmanjšal in tako prizadel financiranje zasebnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa iz prihodkov iz oglaševanja.
ProSiebenSat.1 also made the point that the participation of the large commercial broadcasting groups in the switch-over alongside the PSBs was necessary in order to secure a sufficient degree of consumer acceptance.
ProSiebenSat.1 poleg tega opozarja, da je bila pri prehodu udeležba velikih zasebnih skupin za radiodifuzijo ob javnopravnih televizijskih ustanovah nujna za doseganje zadostne podpore pri potrošnikih.
The comments by ECCA generally supported the views expressed by the Commission in its decision to initiate the procedure.
ECCA je v pripombah na splošno podprl oceno, ki jo je v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka navedla Komisija.
ECCA points out in particular that the measure described placed at a disadvantage the operators of other transmission platforms, which relied exclusively on capital markets to obtain finance.
ECCA še posebej opozarja na dejstvo, da opisani ukrep zapostavlja operaterje drugih prenosnih poti, ki se financirajo izključno s kapitalskimi trgi.
Similarly, the comments by ESOA supported the view expressed by the Commission in the decision to initiate the procedure to the effect that the measure described constituted state aid that was incompatible with the EC Treaty.
ESOA v svojih pripombah podpira tudi oceno, ki jo je Komisija podala v odločbi o sprožitvi postopka, da opisani ukrep predstavlja državno pomoč, ki ni združljiva s Pogodbo ES.
ESOA also pointed out that, in many respects, satellites were a cheaper and more market-oriented form of transmission than digital terrestrial transmission.
ESOA poleg tega poudarja, da so bili sateliti v marsičem ugodnejša in bolj tržno usmerjena oblika radiodifuzijskega prenosa kot digitalni prizemni prenos.
In its comments, DTAG doubted that the assistance granted by Mabb constituted State resources and thus Aid.
DTAG je posredoval pripombe, v katerih izrazil dvom o tem, da pomoč s strani Mabb-a predstavlja državna sredstva in s tem državno pomoč.
It went on to say that T-Systems could not be regarded as an indirect beneficiary.
DTAG nadalje navaja, da T-Systems ni mogoče označiti kot posredno upravičeno podjetje.
T-Systems received appropriate market remuneration for the DVB-T transmission and had also been allocated the frequencies in an open and transparent tender procedure.
T-Systems je za prenos DVB-T prejel ustrezno plačilo in pridobil frekvence na javnem in preglednem razpisu.
In addition, the assistance had to be seen as compensation for the provision of public-interest services by the commercial broadcasters, which had decided to dispense with analogue terrestrial transmission and had switched to DVB-T transmission.
Pomoč bi bilo treba obravnavati kot finančno nadomestilo zasebnim televizijskim postajam za opravljanje storitev, ki so v javnem interesu. Ti so se odpovedali analognemu prizemnemu prenosu in ga zamenjali s prenosom DVB-T.
This also ruled out the existence of indirect assistance for T-Systems.
S tem je izključen tudi obstoj posredne pomoči za T-Systems.
Lastly, DTAG disputed that there had been any distortion of competition between terrestrial, cable and satellite transmission since the three modes of transmission were not substitutable from the point of view of the consumer.
Nazadnje je DTAG zanikal, da je prišlo do kakršnega koli izkrivljanja konkurence med prizemno, kabelsko in satelitsko prenosno potjo, saj te tri prenosne poti z vidika potrošnika medsebojno niso zamenljive.
The Commission notes that the other comments were received after the planned one month deadline and that the interested parties had not asked for any extension.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so ostale pripombe prispele po predvidenem roku enega meseca in da zainteresirane stranke niso zaprosile za podaljšanje roka.
Since these comments have helped, however, to provide a full picture of the form and effect of the measure, they are reproduced below with a view to ensuring a maximum degree of transparency.
Ker pa so te pripombe prispevale k popolnejši predstavi o obliki in učinku zadevnega ukrepa, so v nadaljevanju navedene zaradi ohranitve kar največje preglednosti.
In addition, all comments and information have been passed on to Germany so that it has had the opportunity to comment on them in turn.
Vse pripombe in informacije so bile posredovane Nemčiji, ki je tako imela možnost, da posreduje svoje pripombe.
In its comments, the German Cable Association stated that the measure constituted unilateral assistance for DVB-T from public monies that seriously distorted competition among the competing network infrastructures.
Deutscher Kabelverband je v svojih pripombah izrazil mnenje, da ukrep predstavlja enostransko pomoč DVB-T z javnimi sredstvi, kar je vodilo k hudemu izkrivljanju konkurence med konkurenčnimi omrežnimi infrastrukturami.
The DVB-T network was developed without any financial risk for the network operator since the participation of the commercial broadcasters was guaranteed by providing them with financial assistance.
Izgradnja omrežja DVB-T je bila brez finančnega tveganja za omrežnega operaterja, saj je bila udeležba zasebnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa zagotovljena zaradi finančne podpore.
Furthermore, the German Cable Association noted that neither the tender procedure for DVB-T launched by RegTP nor the tender procedure for broadcasting licences launched by Mabb could be described as open and transparent.
Deutscher Kabelverband tudi navaja, da niti razpisa za omrežje DVB-T s strani RegTP niti razpisa za licence za radiodifuzijo s strani Mabb-a ni mogoče označiti kot javnega in preglednega.
It also doubted that the assistance was necessary since the market participants had a vested interest in the switch-over and since alternatives to the assistance provided had existed.
Združenje poleg tega izraža dvom o tem, ali je bila pomoč nujna, saj so imeli udeleženci na trgu lastni interes za prehod oziroma so imeli poleg pomoči na voljo tudi druge možnosti.
The assistance was not appropriate since it had not been calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred by the broadcasters.
Združenje navaja, da pomoč ni ustrezna, saj ni bila izračunana glede na dejanske stroške izdajatelja.
A similar line was taken by ANGA, which also pointed to the lack of transparency in respect of the result of the tender procedures at the level of the network operation and the broadcasting licences.
Podobnega mnenja je tudi ANGA, ki prav tako opozarja na premajhno preglednost javnih razpisov na ravni upravljanja omrežja in licenc za radiodifuzijo.
It also referred to the vested interest of the network operator and of the broadcasters in the digital terrestrial switch-over.
Opozoril je tudi na lastni interes omrežnega operaterja in izdajateljev televizijskega programa za digitalni prizemni prenos.
Furthermore, it stressed that DVB-T was specifically designed to compete with cable and refuted arguments to the effect that DVB-T would have to be justified as a means of securing plurality of opinion and for socio-political reasons.
ANGA nadalje poudarja ciljno naravnanost DVB-T-ja proti kabelskem prenosu in ugovarja argumentom, ki so DVB-T opravičevali kot sredstvo za zagotavljanje raznolikosti mnenj oziroma zagovarjali socialno-politične razloge.
Lastly, ANGA argued that the collection of customer fees would have been an alternative to public funding.
ANGA je trdil, da bi dvig naročnine lahko predstavljal alternativo podpori.
Kabel BW observed that the assistance granted by Mabb for DVB-T had led to distortion of competition detrimental to satellite and cable services.
Kabel BW navaja, da je pomoč, ki jo je Mabb dodelil DVB-T-ju, vodila k izkrivljanju konkurence v škodo satelitskih in kabelskih storitev.
Applying an analytical model, it also endeavoured to show that assistance for the DVB-T network in Berlin-Brandenburg would not be necessary since the fees accruing to the network operator would be sufficient to cover the costs of digital terrestrial transmission.
S pomočjo analitičnega stroškovnega modela je Kabel BW poskušal dokazati, da podpora za omrežje DVB-T v Berlin-Brandenburgu ne bi bila potrebna, saj so sredstva iz naslova naročnin omrežnega operaterja zadostovala za pokritje stroškov digitalnega prizemnega prenosa.
It concluded from this that compensation in the form of assistance from Mabb was not necessary even if development of the DVB-T network were regarded as a service of general economic interest.
Kabel BW iz tega sklepa, da nadomestilo v obliki pomoči s strani Mabb-a ni bilo nujno, zlasti če je bila izgradnja omrežja DVB-T označena kot storitev splošnega gospodarskega interesa.
COMMENTS FROM THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY
PRIPOMBE ZVEZNE REPUBLIKE NEMČIJE
In its response to the decision to initiate the procedure, Germany takes the view that the assistance granted by Mabb does not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Nemčija je v pripombah glede odločbe o sprožitvi postopka izrazila mnenje, da pomoč, dodeljena s strani Mabb-a, ne predstavlja državne pomoči po členu 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
Firstly, the assistance did not come from State resources since the funds were not under State control, and Mabb was free to decide how they were to be used.
Prvič, pomoč ne izvira iz državnih sredstev, saj sredstva niso bila pod državnim nadzorom, temveč je Mabb samostojno odločal o njihovi porabi.
Secondly, the assistance was not granted to specific beneficiaries.
Drugič, pomoč ni bila dodeljena določenim upravičencem.
This was the case not only with the commercial broadcasters as direct beneficiaries but also with the network operator as indirect beneficiary, since the assistance granted to the undertakings concerned was the result of open and transparent tender procedures.
To se je zgodilo ne le v primeru zasebnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa kot neposrednih upravičencev, temveč tudi v primeru omrežnega operaterja kot posrednega upravičenca, saj je bila pomoč za zadevna podjetja rezultat javnega in preglednega razpisnega postopka.
As a result, no specific undertaking benefited.
Tako je pomoč za določeno podjetje izključena.
Thirdly, Germany states that the assistance did not distort competition.
Tretjič, Nemčija navaja, da pomoč ne izkrivlja konkurence.
In the case of the broadcasters, the digital switch-over increased competition since capacities for additional programme channels became available.
Na ravni izdajateljev televizijskega programa digitalni prehod povečuje konkurenco, saj so zdaj na voljo zmogljivosti za dodatne programe.
In the case of the network operator, the various modes of transmission were not sufficiently substitutable, this being a necessary condition for a distortion of competition.
Na ravni omrežnega operaterja ne obstaja zadostna zamenljivost različnih prenosnih poti, kar bi bilo nujno za izkrivljanje konkurence.
If the Commission were to classify the measure under investigation as state aid, Germany would argue that the measure was compatible with the EC Treaty under Article 87(3)(c), Article 87(3)(d) or Article 86(2).
Če bi Komisija zadevni ukrep opredelila kot državno pomoč, bi zvezna vlada uveljavljala združljivost ukrepa s Pogodbo ES v skladu s členom 87(3)(c), členom 87(3)(d) ali členom 86(2) Pogodbe ES.
Under Article 87(3)(c), the measure contributed to the development of the broadcasting sector since DVB-T allowed more television broadcasters to transmit and promoted the development of new services such as interactive television services or mobile and portable reception.
V skladu s členom 87(3)(c) ukrep doprinaša k razvoju sektorja radiodifuzije, saj DVB-T omogoča prenos več televizijskim postajam in spodbuja razvoj novih storitev, kot so interaktivne televizijske storitve ali mobilni in prenosni sprejem.
In addition, it fostered media plurality, competition between the various modes of digital transmission and an efficient use of frequencies.
Poleg tega pomoč pospešuje medijsko raznolikost, konkurenco med različnimi digitalnimi prenosnimi potmi in učinkovito uporabo frekvenc.
Germany also argues that the assistance in its present form is necessary and appropriate since market forces alone would not have been sufficient to bring about the switch-over and since the measure constituted a relatively small incentive.
Nemčija poleg tega trdi, da je pomoč v obstoječi obliki nujna in ustrezna, saj tržne sile same ne bi zadoščale za izvedbo prehoda, ukrep pa predstavlja razmeroma majhno spodbudo.
On the basis of Article 87(3)(d), Germany argues that the measure can be justified as aid to promote culture and that the assistance served to develop a pluralistic broadcasting system and thus fell within the cultural remit of the Member States.
Na podlagi člena 87(3)(d) Pogodbe ES je Nemčija trdila, da je zadevni ukrep mogoče upravičiti kot pomoč za pospeševanje kulture in da pomoč služi oblikovanju pluralnega sistema radiodifuzije in zato spada v kulturno pristojnost države članice.