natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
AGCOM had concluded that the impact of the purchase of the decoder on the average household income with or without a public subsidy was small and that the market trend indicated that even without the aid more than 50 % of households would have a decoder by 2006 in the best-case scenario and by the beginning of 2008 in the worst-case scenario.
Organ AGCOM je sklenil, da je vpliv nakupa sprejemnika na povprečen prihodek gospodinjstva z javno subvencijo ali brez nje majhen in da tržna gibanja kažejo, da bi tudi brez pomoči več kot 50 % gospodinjstev imelo sprejemnik do leta 2006 v najboljšem možnem primeru in do začetka leta 2008 v najslabšem možnem primeru.
See footnote 24.
Glej sprotno opombo 24.
Case C-75/97 Belgium v Commission [1999] ECR I-3671.
Zadeva C-75/97 Belgija proti Komisiji [1999] Recueil I-3671.
The main barriers were: (a) a regulatory framework that would allow DTT providers to be operational only as of 2007; (b) the requirement to upgrade transmission networks at significant cost; (c) higher transmission costs for DTT than for satellite; (d) the need to roll out a large number of DTT decoders; (e) need for regulators to modify the regime applicable to national frequencies in order to implement simulcast; and (f) the risk that a significant portion of the population may not be covered by the DTT signal.
Glavne ovire so bile: a) regulativni okvir, ki bi ponudnikom DTT omogočal, da začnejo delovati šele z letom 2007; b) zahteva po nadgradnji prenosnih omrežij ob velikih stroških; c) višji stroški prenosa za DTT kot za satelit; d) potreba po dajanju velikega števila sprejemnikov DTT na trg; e) potreba zakonodajnih organov, da spremenijo režim, ki se uporablja za nacionalne frekvence za izvajanje hkratnega prenosa, in (f) tveganje, da signal DTT morda ne bo pokrival bistvenega deleža prebivalstva.
‘Mediaset, the beautiful game’, 18 January 2005.
„Mediaset, the beautiful game“ (Mediaset, čudovita igra), 18. januar 2005.
ANIE argues that Sky's behaviour hinders technological development in that it does not allow the development of decoders using different conditional access systems or other possibilities, such as those offered by open decoders.
Združenje ANIE trdi, da ravnanje družbe Sky ovira tehnološki razvoj, saj ne omogoča razvoja sprejemnikov, ki uporabljajo različne sisteme pogojnega dostopa ali druge možnosti, kot so na primer tiste, ki jih ponujajo odprti sprejemniki.
In particular, Sky hinders the technological development of more advanced common terrestrial and satellite decoders.
Družba Sky zlasti ovira tehnološki razvoj sodobnejših navadnih prizemnih in satelitskih sprejemnikov.
Case C-382/99 Netherlands v Commission [2002] ECR I-5163 and Case C-156/98 Germany v Commission [2000] ECR I-6857, points 24 to 28.
Zadeva C-382/99 Nizozemska proti Komisiji [2002] Recueil I-5163 in zadeva C-156/98 Nemčija proti Komisiji [2000] Recueil I-6857, odstavki 24–28.
The ‘smart-card’ referred to here is a device that can identify the user and allows on-line transactions to be made.
Tukaj omenjena „pametna kartica“ je naprava, ki lahko prepozna uporabnika in omogoča izvajanje spletnih transakcij.
‘Mediaset, the beautiful game’, (see footnote 33).
„Mediaset, the beautiful game“ (Mediaset, čudovita igra), nav. (glej sprotno opombo 33).
AGCOM's Annual Report, 30 June 2006.
Letno poročilo AGCOM, 30. junij 2006.
Case C-156/98 (see footnote 35).
Zadeva C-156/98 nav.
In this case the indirect beneficiary would probably not have acted without the state intervention: the beneficiaries are the companies invested in by the investors that receive the fiscal advantage, and it is possible that there are cases in which such companies do not even act in order to receive the advantage.
(glej sprotno opombo 35). V tem primeru posredni upravičenec verjetno ne bi deloval brez državnega ukrepanja: upravičenci so podjetja, v katera vlagajo investitorji, ki dobijo fiskalno ugodnost, možno pa je, da obstajajo primeri, v katerih taka podjetja sploh ne delujejo, da bi dobila ugodnost.
As the Court makes clear in points 25 to 28 of its judgment, a measure constitutes aid where the origin of the advantage indirectly conferred on undertakings is the renunciation by the Member State of tax revenue which it would normally have received, inasmuch as it is this renunciation which has enabled investors to take up holdings in those undertakings on conditions which are more advantageous.
Kot Sodišče pojasni v odstavkih 25 do 28 svoje sodbe, je ukrep pomoč, če je ugodnost, ki je posredno dana podjetjem, posledica dejstva, da se država članica odpove davčnim prihodkom, ki bi jih običajno prejela, ker je ta odpoved investitorjem omogočila, da kupijo kapitalski delež v teh podjetjih pod ugodnejšimi pogoji.
The fact that investors take independent decisions does not mean that the connection between the tax licence and the advantage given to the undertakings in question has been eliminated since, in economic terms, the alteration of the market conditions which gives rise to the advantage is the consequence of the public authorities' loss of tax revenue.
Dejstvo, da investitorji sprejemajo samostojne odločitve, ne pomeni, da je bila povezava med davčno licenco in ugodnostjo, dano zadevnim podjetjem, odpravljena, saj je v ekonomskem smislu sprememba tržnih pogojev, ki povzroči ugodnost, posledica izgube davčnih prihodkov javnih organov.
As already explained in recital 9, digital transmission is more efficient in the use of the radiofrequency spectrum.
Kot je že bilo pojasnjeno v točki 9 zgoraj, digitalni prenos učinkoviteje uporablja radiofrekvenčni spekter.
See Article 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive).
Glej člen 9 Direktive 2002/21/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve (Okvirna direktiva).
‘Triple play’ is a marketing term for the joint provision of high-speed Internet, telephone and television services over a broadband connection.
„Storitve trojček“ je trženjski izraz za skupno zagotavljanje hitrih internetnih, telefonskih in televizijskih storitev prek širokopasovne povezave.
See point 88(d) of AGCOM's Report (see footnote 20).
Glej točko 88(d) poročila AGCOM, nav. (glej sprotno opombo 20).
Italian Competition Authority: Conclusion of fact-finding investigation into sale of television commercials, Rome, 6 December 2004.
Italijanski organ, pristojen za konkurenco: Zaključek preiskave za ugotavljanje dejstev o prodaji televizijskih reklam, Rim, 6. decembra 2004.
See footnote 5.
Nav. (glej sprotno opombo 5).
Judgment of 24 July 2003 in Case C-280/00 Altmark Trans GmbH [2003] ECR I-7747, points 88 to 94.
Sodba z dne 24. julija 2003 v zadevi C-280/00 Altmark Trans GmbH [2003] Recueil I-7747, odstavki 88–94.
See AGCOM's Report, points 50 to 56.
Glej poročilo AGCOM, nav., točke 50 do 56.
Judgment of 8 March 1988 in joined cases C 62/87 and C 72/87 Exécutif régional wallon and SA Glaverbel v Commission [1988] ECR I-1573.
Sodba z dne 8. marca 1988 v združenih zadevah C 62/87 in C 72/87 Exécutif régional wallon in SA Glaverbel proti Komisiji [1988] Recueil I-1573.
COM(2003)541 final and COM(2005)204 final, (see footnote 7).
COM(2003) 541 konč. in COM(2005) 204 konč., nav. (glej sprotno opombo 7).
Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2005)229 final, 1 June 2005.
Sporočilo Komisije Svetu, Evropskemu parlamentu, Ekonomsko-socialnemu odboru in Odboru regij, COM(2005) 229 konč., 1. junija 2005.
See COM (2004) 541 (see footnote 7).
Glej COM(2004) 541, nav. (glej sprotno opombo 7).
See also Commission final Decision 2006/513/EC (see footnote 24).
Glej tudi dokončno odločbo Komisije 2006/513/ES – nav. (glej sprotno opombo 24).
It is the Commission's belief that, given the particular situation of strong vertical integration of the Italian TV market, the risks referred to by the parties are not very great, at least for certain operators.
Komisija verjame, da glede na posebne razmere močne vertikalne povezanosti italijanskega televizijskega trga, tveganja, na katera se sklicujejo stranke, niso zelo velika, vsaj za nekatere operaterje.
This view held by the Commission seems to be shared by certain financial operators.
Zdi se, da si to stališče Komisije delijo določeni finančni operaterji.
Indeed, Deutsche Bank in its study quoted above states ‘Surely the risk is that ... Mediaset is helping undermine its own terrestrial franchise... we believe that... as analogue TV will be switched off, it is far more sensible to capitalise on the opportunity created by the technological pay-TV hardware vacuum arising due largely to Italy's unique broadcasting infrastructure.
Deutsche Bank v svoji zgoraj citirani študiji dejansko izjavi: „Nedvomno je tveganje, da … družba Mediaset pomaga slabiti svojo lastno prizemno franšizo… verjamemo, da… ko bo izklopljena analogna televizija, je veliko bolj razumno imeti koristi od možnosti, ki jo ponuja tehnološka praznina strojne opreme plačljive televizije, ki nastaja predvsem zaradi edinstvene radiodifuzijske infrastrukture Italije.
We suspect Mediaset and RAI will jointly continue to dominate audience shares in DTT...Given their control of access to DTT customers for new entrant channels seeking to join their multiplexes, we believe their control of the competitive landscape is assured’.
Sumimo, da bosta družba Mediaset in javna radiotelevizija RAI skupaj še naprej obvladovali deleže gledalcev v DTT… Glede na njun nadzor nad dostopom do uporabnikov DTT za nove vstopne kanale, ki se skušajo pridružiti njunim multipleksom, verjamemo, da je njun nadzor nad konkurenco na trgu zagotovljen.“
Case C-70/72 Commission v Germany [1973] ECR-813, point 13.
Zadeva C-70/72 Komisija proti Nemčiji [1973] Recueil - 813, odstavek 13.
Joined Cases C-278/92, C-279/92 and C-280/92 Spain v Commission [1994] ECR I-4103, point 75.
Združene zadeve C-278/92, C-279/92 in C-280/92 Španija proti Komisiji [1994] Recueil I-4103, odstavek 75.
Case C-75/97 Belgium v Commission [1999] ECR I-3671, points 64 and 65.
Zadeva C-75/97 Belgija proti Komisiji [1999] Recueil I-3671, odstavka 64–65.
Italy is referring to case C-75/97.
Italija se sklicuje na zadevo C-75/97.
Case C-169/95 Spain v Commission [1997] ECR I-135, point 51.
Zadeva C-169/95 Španija proti Komisiji [1997] Recueil I-135, odstavek 51.
Case C 5/89 Commission v Germany (BUG-Alutechnik) [1990] ECR I-3437, points 13 and 14.
Zadeva C 5/89 Komisija proti Nemčiji (BUG-Alutechnik) [1990] Recueil I-3437, odstavka 13 in 14.
Case C-156/98 Germany v Commission, (see footnote 35).
Zadeva C-156/98 Nemčija proti Komisiji, nav. (glej sprotno opombo 35).
Case C-303/88 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1433, point 57.
Zadeva C-303/88 Italija proti Komisiji [1991] Recueil I-1433, odstavek 57.
See, in particular, Case C-480/98 Spain v Commission [2000] ECR I-8717, point 25, and Case C-415/03 Commission v Greece [2005] ECR I-3875, point 39.
Glej zlasti zadevo C-480/98 Španija proti Komisiji [2000] Recueil I-8717, odstavek 25, in zadevo C-415/03 Komisija proti Grčiji [2005] Recueil I-3875, odstavek 39.
These models are widely use in academic literature to assess issues relating to consumer choice.
Ti modeli se veliko uporabljajo v akademski literaturi za ocenjevanje vprašanj, povezanih z izbiro uporabnikov.
These are often referred to as ‘avoidable costs’, i.e. costs that would have been avoided in the scenario where no additional viewer was induced by the subsidy.
Tem stroškom se pogosto pravi „izogibni stroški“, tj. stroški, ki bi se jim izognili, če ne bi bil noben dodaten gledalec pridobljen s subvencijo.
Case C 94/87 Commission v Germany [1989] ECR-175, point 9; Case C-348/93 Commission v Italy [1995] ECR I-673, point 17.
Zadeva C 94/87 Komisija proti Nemčiji [1989] Recueil - 175, odstavek 9; zadeva C-348/93 Komisija proti Italiji [1995] Recueil I-673, odstavek 17.
Information regarding the implementation of Commission Decision C(2006)6634 on State aid scheme C 52/2005 (ex NN 88/2005, ex CP 101/2004) — Italy: subsidy for digital decoders
Informacije v zvezi z izvajanjem Odločbe Komisije C(2006)6634 o shemi državne pomoči C 52/2005 (prej NN 88/2005, prej CP 101/2004) – Italija: subvencija za digitalne sprejemnike
Calculation of the amount to be recovered
Izračun zneska, ki ga je treba vrniti
Please provide the following details regarding the amount of unlawful State aid that has been put at the disposal of the recipient:
Navedite naslednje podrobne podatke glede zneska nezakonite državne pomoči, ki je bila dana na razpolago prejemniku:
Please explain in detail how the interest payable on the amount to be recovered will be calculated.
Podrobno pojasnite, kako bodo izračunane zapadle obresti za znesek, ki ga je treba vrniti.
Recovery measures planned or already taken
Načrtovani ali že sprejeti ukrepi za vračilo
Please describe in detail what measures have been taken and what measures are planned to bring about the immediate and effective recovery of the aid.
Podrobno opišite, kateri ukrepi so bili sprejeti in kateri ukrepi se načrtujejo za izvedbo takojšnjega in učinkovitega vračila pomoči.
Please also explain what alternative measures exist in national law to bring about recovery.
Pojasnite tudi, kateri nadomestni ukrepi obstajajo v nacionalni zakonodaji za izvedbo vračila.
Where relevant, please indicate the legal basis for the measures taken or planned.
Če je primerno, navedite pravno podlago za sprejete ali načrtovane ukrepe.
By what date will the recovery of the aid be completed?
Do katerega datuma bo zaključeno vračilo pomoči?
Recovery already effected
Že izvedeno vračilo
Please provide the following details of aid that has been recovered from the recipient:
Predložite naslednje podatke o pomoči, ki jo je prejemnik vrnil:
Amount of aid repaid
Znesek vrnjene pomoči
Please attach supporting documents for the repayments shown in the table at point 3.1.
Priložite dokazila za vračila pomoči iz tabele v točki 3.1.
Date or dates on which the aid or individual instalments of aid were put at the disposal of the recipient (if the measure consists of several instalments and reimbursements, use separate rows).
Datum ali datumi, ko je bila pomoč ali posamezni obroki pomoči dani na razpolago prejemniku (če je ukrep sestavljen iz več obrokov in povračil, uporabite ločene vrstice).
Amount of aid put at the disposal of the recipient, in gross grant equivalent.
Znesek pomoči, dan na razpolago prejemniku, v bruto protivrednosti pomoči v obliki nepovratnih sredstev.
Date or dates on which the aid was repaid.
Datum ali datumi, ko je bila pomoč vrnjena.
By letter dated 10 February 2005, the complainant provided further information and comments, according to which the Italian Government had refinanced the measure under Article 1(211) of Law No 311/2004 (2005 Finance Act). The complainant called on the Commission to initiate a formal investigation procedure.
Z dopisom z dne 10. februarja 2005 je pritožnik predložil dodatne informacije in pripombe, v katerem je potrdil, da je italijanska vlada refinancirala ukrep na podlagi člena 1(211) zakona št. 311/2004 (finančni zakon za leto 2005), in pozval Komisijo, naj sproži formalni postopek preiskave.
The measure has been successful for two reasons.
Ukrep je bil uspešen iz dveh razlogov.
Apparently, some 2 million Italian nationals have bought a subsidised decoder.
Baje je okoli 2 milijona italijanskih državljanov kupilo subvencioniran sprejemnik.
The prime benefit of digitisation is the increased transmission capacity on all platforms as a result of more efficient use of the radiofrequency spectrum, as compared to analogue broadcasting.
Glavna korist digitalizacije v primerjavi z analogno radiodifuzijo je povečana zmogljivost prenosa na vseh platformah zaradi učinkovitejše uporabe radiofrekvenčnega spektra.
This is particularly relevant for terrestrial TV in view of the limited availability of the frequency spectrum.
To je še zlasti pomembno za prizemno televizijo zaradi omejene razpoložljivosti frekvenčnega spektra.
Interoperability can easily be achieved through the adoption of open standards by broadcasters and through the use of the corresponding open interfaces in decoders.
Medobratovalnost je mogoče z lahkoto doseči s sprejetjem odprtih standardov s strani izdajateljev televizijskega programa ali z uporabo ustreznih odprtih vmesnikov v sprejemnikih.
Alternatively, interoperability would require the owners of non-open proprietary technologies to agree to make available the necessary technical specifications.
Druga možnost je, da bi medobratovalnost od imetnikov neodprtih zaščitenih tehnologij zahtevala, da se dogovorijo in dajo na razpolago potrebne tehnične specifikacije.
On 27 July 2006 the Commission sent AGCOM its comments pursuant to Article 7(3) of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive).
Dne 27. julija 2006 je Komisija organu AGCOM poslala svoje pripombe v skladu s členom 7(3) Direktive 2002/21/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 7. marca 2002 o skupnem regulativnem okviru za elektronska komunikacijska omrežja in storitve (Okvirna direktiva).
The Commission broadly agreed with AGCOM's conclusions but asked for a more in-depth analysis and invited AGCOM to notify remedies as soon as possible.
Komisija se je na splošno strinjala s sklepi organa AGCOM, vendar je zaprosila za podrobnejšo analizo in organ AGCOM pozvala, naj jo čim prej uradno obvesti o popravnih ukrepih.
In order to fight piracy, at the end of 2004 Sky began codifying its signal with the so-called NDS proprietary technology.
Za boj proti piratstvu je družba Sky konec leta 2004 začela kodirati svoj signal s tako imenovano zaščiteno tehnologijo NDS.
Ten of these national channels were broadcast in simulcast with analogue terrestrial television (simultaneous broadcasting in analogue and digital mode).
Deset izmed teh nacionalnih kanalov se je oddajalo hkrati z analogno prizemno televizijo (hkratna analogna in digitalna radiodifuzija).
Four channels had been created specifically for digital broadcasting; the remaining channels were broadcast in simulcast with satellite transmissions.
Štirje kanali so bili posebej ustvarjeni za digitalno radiodifuzijo, preostali kanali pa so se oddajali hkrati s satelitskimi prenosi.
Total costs were EUR 150 million. Given the timing of the switchover, the fact that RAI transmits only free-to-air programmes, the very small number of viewers and the non-inclusion of the cost of digitalisation in the annual licence fee for 2004, 2005 and 2006, the only costs borne by RAI are the technological costs (frequencies and infrastructure), costs which RAI would have to bear without the subsidy in question, while speeding up digitalisation did not guarantee additional revenue.
Celotni stroški so znašali 150 milijonov EUR. Glede na časovni okvir prehoda, dejstvo, da javna radiotelevizija RAI prenaša samo brezplačne programe, zelo majhno število gledalcev in nevključitev stroškov digitalizacije v letno licenčnino za leta 2004, 2005 in 2006 so edini stroški, ki jih krije javna radiotelevizija RAI, tehnološki stroški (frekvence in infrastruktura), to so stroški, ki bi jih morala javna radiotelevizija RAI kriti brez zadevne subvencije, medtem ko pospeševanje digitalizacije ni zagotovilo dodatnih prihodkov.
Similar arguments are put forward by Mediaset, which maintains that the measure is not selective because the aid is granted to consumers and that the selectivity arises from Sky's business choice to use NDS technology.
Podobne argumente je izpostavila družba Mediaset, ki trdi, da ukrep ni selektiven, ker je pomoč dodeljena uporabnikom, in da selektivnost izhaja iz poslovne izbire družbe Sky, da bo uporabljala tehnologijo NDS.
This is what creates the discrimination and enables Sky to charge a subscription fee to recoup the cost of the decoders.
To je tisto, kar povzroča diskriminacijo in družbi Sky omogoča zaračunavanje naročnine za nadomestitev stroška sprejemnikov.
The measure would foster a project of common European interest — the switchover — which is part of a transnational programme supported by various Member States, in line with existing case law (C-62/87 and C-72/87, paragraph 22).
Ukrep bi pospeševal projekt skupnega evropskega interesa, to je prehod na digitalno tehnologijo, ki je del nadnacionalnega programa, ki ga podpirajo različne države članice v skladu z obstoječo sodno prakso (C-62/87 in C-72/87, odstavek 22).
The exclusion of satellite decoders is explained in the general comment above.
Izključitev satelitskih sprejemnikov je pojasnjena v splošni pripombi zgoraj.
Incumbents are not compensated for increased competition by a cost reduction and therefore they have no incentives to switch-off.
Prvotni operaterji ne prejmejo nadomestila za večjo konkurenco v obliki znižanja stroškov in zato nimajo nobenih spodbud za prehod.
Indeed, if there is in fact any advantage, this should be seen as compensation for the costs incurred by incumbents.
Če dejansko obstaja kakšna prednost, bi bilo to pravzaprav treba šteti kot nadomestilo za stroške, ki so jih imeli prvotni operaterji.
The Commission should not impose recovery of the aid when this is against a general principle of Community law.
Komisija ne sme naložiti vračila pomoči, če je to v nasprotju s splošnim načelom prava Skupnosti.
This is the case when it is clear from the outset that recovery is impossible.
To drži, če je že od začetka jasno, da je vračilo nemogoče.
Sky Italia, ESOA and Europa7 agree with the Commission that the measure constitutes aid for DTT operators.
Družba Sky Italia, združenje ESOA in družba Europa7 se strinjajo s Komisijo, da je ukrep pomoč za operaterje DTT.
Sky rents decoders containing this closed technology to its subscribers.
Družba Sky daje svojim naročnikom v najem sprejemnike, ki vključujejo to zaprto tehnologijo.
When it decided to change to NDS technology, Sky accordingly replaced all its subscribers' decoders.
Ko se je družba Sky odločila za prehod na tehnologijo NDS, je zamenjala vse sprejemnike svojih naročnikov.
First, there must be an intervention by the State or through State resources.
Prvič, obstajati mora ukrep države ali ukrep prek državnih sredstev.
Second, it must confer a selective economic advantage on the recipient.
Drugič, prejemniku mora dati selektivno gospodarsko prednost.
The Commission also disagrees with the other arguments put forward by Italy and the other parties that there is no advantage.
Komisija se prav tako ne strinja z drugimi argumenti, ki so jih predstavile Italija in druge stranke, da ne obstaja nobena prednost.
First, the Commission disagrees with Italy's argument that there is no advantage because it is impossible to determine the amount of public resources transferred to the beneficiaries.
Prvič, Komisija se ne strinja z argumentom Italije, da prednost ne obstaja, ker je nemogoče opredeliti znesek državnih sredstev, ki je bil prenesen upravičencem.
Finally, the measure is not designed so that it is proportional to the costs of switchover.
Nazadnje, ukrep ni zasnovan tako, da je sorazmeren s stroški prehoda.
Firstly, it does not seem to the Commission that a consumer subsidy can easily be devised so that it is proportional to the costs possibly incurred by companies in the switchover process.
Prvič, Komisiji se ne zdi, da ni mogoče z lahkoto zasnovati subvencijo za porabnike tako, da je sorazmerna s stroški, ki jih mogoče imajo družbe v procesu prehoda.
The effect of the subsidy is basically to make the decoders targeted by the measure cheaper for consumers.
Učinek subvencije je v bistvu narediti sprejemnike, ki so predmet ukrepa, cenejše za uporabnike.
This allows the producers either to increase their sales without lowering the price of the product or to raise the price without losing customers.
Tako lahko proizvajalci bodisi povečajo svojo prodajo brez znižanja cene proizvoda ali zvišajo ceno, ne da bi izgubili stranke.