natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In any event, if the Measure is found to constitute State aid, it would be compatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(2)(b) of the Treaty — as the release of the Digital Dividend is, according to the Spanish authorities, an exceptional occurrence.
Ta pravica velja tudi za zasebne izdajatelje televizijskega programa, ki imajo licenco, vendar samo prek obveznosti 96-odstotnega pokritja in na dopolnilen način.
Alternatively, the Measure could be declared compatible with the internal market pursuant to Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty, since according to the Spanish authorities the Measure: (i) supports the European policy on transforming the Digital Dividend into social benefits and economic growth; (ii) remedies a market failure; (iii) is the appropriate instrument, since it will apply only to those broadcasters who are compelled to incur unwanted costs due to the imposition of simultaneous broadcasting and the compensation will be strictly limited to the amount of these exceptional expenses; (iv) has an incentive effect since if there was no aid, broadcasters may be reluctant to take part in the reallocation of spectrum and to ensure simulcast; (v) is proportionate, as it only covers the additional costs incurred by broadcasters due to the reallocation of channels; (vi) is technologically neutral, since other platforms are not affected by the change of channels necessary to liberate the Digital Dividend; and (vii) would not distort competition, since if the broadcasters had to assume the costs without compensation, this would frustrate their expectations of growth and would benefit participants in other markets.
Glede tehnološke nevtralnosti so španski organi natančneje poudarili, da je njihovo obvestilo spoštovalo to načelo v smislu, da lahko zasebni izdajatelji televizijskega programa izberejo katero koli platformo za izpolnitev obveznosti sočasnega oddajanja (satelit, kabel, ADSL, optična vlakna ali DTT).
In the opening decision, the Spanish authorities were invited to submit comments concerning the Measure and to provide, inter alia, the following information: (i) documents (such as correspondence with broadcasters, declarations) demonstrating their inability to finance the simulcast period from they own resources; (ii) proof (such as tender, ex ante analysis of the costs/benefits, public consultation on the subject, etc.) which would justify the choice of terrestrial platform (reallocation of the terrestrial broadcasting to lower terrestrial frequency band) to solve the frequency scarcity problem; (iii) a summary of rights and obligations broadcasters have under the current licences, concessions, conditions under which these licences/concession can be modified and the consequences of such modifications (for the State as well as for the broadcasters); (iv) a detailed overview of the costs linked to the adjustment of infrastructure each broadcaster is financing from its own resources; (v) an explanation on the impact of the timing of the release of the Digital Dividend; and (vi) more information about the eligibility of the broadcasters of the pay-TV channels currently broadcasted via DTT.
Vendar so navedli, da ukrep velja izključno v obdobju sočasnega oddajanja, pozneje pa ne.
The Spanish authorities replied that most of this information was already provided prior to the launch of the formal investigation procedure.
Po zaključku (prehodnega) obdobja sočasnega oddajanja ostane v veljavi obveznost, da ti izdajatelji televizijskega programa zagotovijo geografsko pokritje prek DTT, kot je predvideno v veljavnih licencah.
The Spanish authorities made specific comments on the question regarding the required evidence that would justify the choice of the terrestrial platform to solve the frequency scarcity problem by arguing that this issue goes beyond the assessment of neutrality of the Measure and that they are not obliged to justify intended compensatory measures clearly compatible with Union law.
Poleg tega so španski organi pojasnili, da obveznost zasebnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa, da zagotovijo 96-odstotno pokritje v območju I prek DTT, ne pomeni, da bi natančno ta odstotek španskega prebivalstva dejansko sprejemal programe prizemnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa prek sprejemnih sistemov DTT.
The Spanish authorities maintained the same line of arguments in relation to the private broadcasters' licences in the sense that it is the State's right to impose non-technologically neutral licences to ensure the prescribed 96 % coverage obligation in Area I. They also stated that even if these licences do not foresee the right of private broadcasters to compensation for any costs related to the release of the Digital Dividend, these licences also do not exclude such compensation.
Razlog za navedeno je, da se območje pokritja z alternativnimi tehnologijami lahko prekriva z območjem DTT [49].
Moreover, they have explained that all private broadcasters providing audiovisual services in the public interest without a licence are free to choose from the available platform technologies.
Španski organi so zaključili, da ukrep zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa, ki delujejo na platformi DTT, ne daje nobene gospodarske prednosti, saj je omejen na povračilo izrednih stroškov sočasnega oddajanja, neposredno povzročenih z obveznostjo sprostitve pasu 800 MHz.
This right also applies to private broadcasters holding a licence but only beyond the 96 % coverage obligation and in a complementary manner.
Odzivi španskih organov na pripombe družbe Astra
As regards technological neutrality more specifically, the Spanish authorities argued that their notification respected this principle in the sense that the private broadcasters were free to choose whatever platform to ensure the simulcast obligation (satellite, cable, ADSL, optic fibre or DTT).
Kot je omenjeno v uvodni izjavi 4, so španski organi posredovali stališča na pripombe družbe Astra, predložene med formalno preiskavo.
They have specified, however, that the Measure applies exclusively to the period of simulcast and not beyond.
Poudarili so, da Astra ni zagotovila dodatnih informacij, ki bi presegale argumente, vsebovane v sklepu o začetku postopka.
Once the simulcast (transitory) period is over, the obligation of these broadcasters to ensure the geographical coverage via DTT, as foreseen in the valid licences, remains in place.
Španski organi so poudarili, da kritika družbe Astra jasno presega obseg priglašenega ukrepa, ki je omejen na začasno nadomestilo stroškov za sočasno oddajanje, povzročenih zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa.
In addition, the Spanish authorities explained that the obligation of private broadcasters to ensure the 96 % coverage obligation in Area I via DTT does not mean that exactly this percentage of Spanish population would actually receive the programmes of the terrestrial broadcasters via DTT reception systems.
Po mnenju španskih organov želi Astra spremeniti španski regulativni okvir za oddajanje televizijskih kanalov v območju I, kar ni predmet obvestila.
This is because the area of coverage of alternative technologies can overlap with that of DTT [49].
Španski organi so tudi pojasnili, da se ukrep v praksi ne uporablja le za zasebne izdajatelje televizijskega programa, ki uporabljajo tehnologijo DTT, ampak za vse izdajatelje kanalov FTA, ki obstajajo v Španiji.
The Spanish authorities concluded that the Measure does not grant to private broadcasters operating on the DTT platform any economic advantage as it limits itself to the reimbursement of the exceptional costs of simulcast that are directly triggered by their obligation to liberate the 800 MHz band.
Razlog za to je, da ne obstajajo izključni izdajatelji televizijskega programa na alternativnih platformah, predvsem na satelitu.
Reactions of the Spanish authorities on the comments of Astra
Satelit se uporablja za radiodifuzijo plačljivih televizijskih kanalov (tujih kanalov FTA in mednarodnih različic določenih kanalov), združenih v Canal+ [50].
As mentioned in recital 4, the Spanish authorities submitted observations on the comments of Astra presented during the formal investigation.
Glede na navedeno španski organi menijo, da izdajatelji televizijskih kanalov DTT FTA in platforma Canal+ na podlagi satelita v nobenem primeru niso del istega trga.
They have emphasised that Astra does not provide additional information beyond the arguments contained in the opening decision.
Španski organi so se nato podrobno odzvali na mnenje Astre, da ukrep nima podlage v pravnem redu Unije, s sklicevanjem na Sklep št. 243/2012/EU in Direktivo 2002/20/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta („Direktiva o odobritvi“) [51].
The Spanish authorities have highlighted that Astra's criticism goes clearly beyond the scope of the notified Measure that is limited to a temporary compensation to private broadcasters for the costs incurred for simultaneous broadcasting.
Glede njihovih argumentov na podlagi Sklepa št. 243/2012/EU so poudarili, da v skladu s členom 6(5) tega sklepa „države članice lahko po potrebi in v skladu s pravom Unije zagotovijo ustrezno nadomestilo za neposredne stroške preselitve ali prerazporeditve uporabe spektra v skladu z nacionalnim pravom“.
In the opinion of the Spanish authorities, Astra aims at modifications to the Spanish regulatory framework for the transmission of TV channels in Area I that is not subject of the notification.
Španski organi so to določbo tolmačili v povezavi z uvodno izjavo 18, v kateri je navedeno: „državam članicam bi bilo treba dovoliti, da po potrebi sprejmejo kompenzacijske ukrepe v zvezi s stroški prehoda.“
The Spanish authorities also explained that in practice the Measure applies not only to private broadcasters using the DTT technology but to all broadcasters of FTA channels that exist in Spain.
V zvezi z argumenti glede Direktive o odobritvi se španske oblasti niso strinjale z Astrinim tolmačenjem člena 14.
This is because there are no exclusive broadcasters on alternative platforms, and in particular on satellite.
Skladno s to določbo „države članice zagotovijo, da se lahko pravice, pogoji in postopki v zvezi s splošnimi odobritvami in pravicami uporabe ali pravicami do vgradnje naprav spremenijo le v objektivno utemeljenih primerih in ob upoštevanju sorazmernosti“.
Satellite is used for the broadcasting of pay-TV channels (FTA foreign channels and international versions of certain channels), grouped in Canal+ [50].
Ta člen določa tudi, da „države članice ne omejijo ali odvzamejo pravic do vgradnje naprav pred iztekom roka, za katerega so bile podeljene, razen kadar je to utemeljeno in primerno v skladu z ustreznimi nacionalnimi določbami o odškodninah za odvzem pravic“.
Against this background, the Spanish authorities consider that in any case the broadcasters of FTA DTT channels and the platform Canal+ based on satellite are not part of the same market.
V tem kontekstu so španski organi navedli, da v nasprotju z navedbami v sklepu o začetku postopka licence izdajateljev televizijskega programa ne izključujejo nadomestila za stroške sočasnega oddajanja, ker to v trenutku podelitve licenc niso bili predvidljivi stroški [52].
The Spanish authorities then reacted in detail on Astra's opinion that the Measure has no backing in Union law, with reference to Decision No 243/2012/EU and Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [51] (the ‘Authorisation Directive’).
Glede združljivosti ukrepa s pravnim redom Unije se španski organi ne strinjajo s primeri sodne prakse sodišč EU, navedenimi v uvodnih izjavah 65–67 sklepa o začetku postopka glede ukrepa, ker: (1) je nadomestilo, ki ga predvideva ukrep, neposredna posledica naložene obveznosti sočasnega oddajanja; (2) je prej omenjena obveznost združljiva s Sklepom št. 243/2012/EU, ki, kot je bilo že pojasnjeno, predvideva pravico do nadomestila; (3) je bil zakonski okvir za nadomestilo sprejet kot posledica naložitve obveznosti sočasnega oddajanja; (4) se stroški, nastali zaradi te obveznosti, natančno ujemajo z obsegom nadomestila.
As regards their arguments with reference to Decision No 243/2012/EU, they pointed out that according to its Article 6(5) ‘Member States may, where appropriate and in conformity with Union law, ensure that the direct cost of migration or reallocation of spectrum usage is adequately compensated in accordance with national law’.
Z vidika načrtovane sprostitve pasu 700 MHz do leta 2020 španski organi menijo, da lahko negativen sklep Komisije glede ukrepa ustvari ovire za gladek potek te pobude EU.
The Spanish authorities read this provision in conjunction with recital 18 which states that ‘Member States should be allowed, where appropriate, to introduce compensatory measures relating to migration costs.’
Nadomestilo za stroške sočasnega oddajanja, povzročene javnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa
As for the arguments concerning the Authorisation Directive, the Spanish authorities argued with Astra's reading of Article 14.
Septembra 2014, po sprejetju Kraljeve uredbe 677/2014, so španski organi umaknili priglasitev v zvezi z nadomestili za stroške sočasnega oddajanja, povzročene javnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa.
According to this provision, ‘Member States shall ensure that the rights, conditions and procedures concerning general authorisations and rights of use or rights to install facilities may only be amended in objectively justified cases and in a proportionate manner’.
V Kraljevi uredbi je navedenih devet javnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa.
This article also prescribes that ‘Member States shall not restrict or withdraw rights to install facilities before expiry of the period for which they were granted except where justified and where applicable in conformity with relevant national provisions regarding compensation for withdrawal of rights’.
Eden pokriva celotno ozemlje Španije (RTVE), osem pa jih ima regionalni značaj.
In this context, the Spanish authorities argued that contrary to what is stated in the opening decision, the broadcasters' licences do not exclude the compensation for the simulcast costs because these were not foreseeable costs at the moment of the granting of licences [52].
Za vse te javne izdajatelje televizijskega programa z jasno opredeljenim opravljanjem javne storitve je bilo sočasno oddajanje opredeljeno za obvezno, da se omogoči prilagoditev sprejemnih sistemov gospodinjstev brez prekinitve sprejema.
As for the compatibility of the Measure with Union law, the Spanish authorities disagree with the examples of precedents of the case law of EU Courts quoted in recitals 65-67 of the opening decision in relation to the Measure, because: (1) the compensation foreseen by the Measure is a direct consequence of the imposed simulcast obligation; (2) the latter obligation is compatible with Decision No 243/2012/EU that, as explained, foresees the right to compensation; (3) the legal framework for the compensation was adopted as a consequence of the imposition of the simulcast obligation; (4) the costs generated by this obligation correspond exactly with the scope of the compensation.
Skupni znesek javnega financiranja je bil nižji od prvotno predvidenega v priglasitvi iz leta 2011 in tudi trajanje sočasnega oddajanja je bilo skrajšano [53].
With a view of the planned liberation of the 700 MHz band by 2020, the Spanish authorities are of the opinion that a negative Commission decision on the Measure can create an obstacle for the smooth running of that EU initiative.
Španski organi so obvestili Komisijo, da je Kraljeva uredba v skladu s Sklepom Komisije št. 2012/21/EU [54], zato je ni treba priglasiti.
Compensation of simulcast costs incurred by public broadcasters
Španski organi niso umaknili dela priglasitve v okviru ukrepa, ki se nanaša na nadomestilo za sočasno oddajanje zasebnim izdajateljem televizijskega programa [55].
In September 2014, following the adoption of Royal Decree 677/2014, the Spanish authorities withdrew the notification concerning the compensation of simulcast costs incurred by public broadcasters.
Pripombe zainteresiranih strani
The Royal Decree identifies nine public broadcasters.
Vse zainteresirane strani, navedene v uvodni izjavi 4, razen družbe Astra, so predstavile argumente proti predhodnim zaključkom Komisije glede ukrepa.
One covers the entire territory of Spain (RTVE) and eight have a regional character.
Pripombe družbe Astra
For all these public broadcasters, with a clearly defined public service remit, the simulcast was declared mandatory in order to allow the adaptation of the reception systems of households without the loss of service.
Po mnenju družbe Astra, satelitskega operaterja v zasebni lasti, ukrep jasno predstavlja državno pomoč, krši načelo tehnološke nevtralnosti in bi okrepil prevladujočo platformo DTT operaterja Abertis.
The total amount of public funding was lower than the one originally foreseen in the 2011 notification and the duration of simulcast was shortened as well [53].
Po njenem mnenju je Abertis neposredni upravičenec ukrepa.
The Spanish authorities informed the Commission that the Royal Decree complies with Commission Decision 2012/21/EU [54] and therefore does not need to be notified.
Glede vpliva ukrepa družba Astra meni, da bi ne glede na njegovo omejitev nadomestila za sočasno oddajanje v praksi pokril vse stroške izdajateljev televizijskega programa, povezane s sprostitvijo digitalne dividende.
As regards the simulcast compensation for private broadcasters [55], the Spanish authorities have not withdrawn this part of the notification under the Measure.
Družba Astra se strinja s Komisijo, da obveznost sočasnega oddajanja zasebnih izdajateljev televizijskega programa izhaja iz nacionalne zakonodaje (regulativnega ukrepa) in kot takšna ne sproži pravice do nadomestila.
Comments from interested parties
Po navedbah družbe Astra NTP določa, da lahko javni organi vzpostavijo posebne pogoje za radiodifuzijo, ki niso predvideni v licencah, kot posledico reguliranja trga ali tehničnega razvoja brez pravice do nadomestila.
All interested parties identified in recital 4, with the exception of Astra, have presented arguments against the preliminary conclusions of the Commission on the Measure.
Družba Astra tudi poudarja dejstvo, da so izdajatelji televizijskega programa DTT vedeli za sprostitev digitalne dividende in s tem povezan prenos frekvenc pred sprejetjem Kraljeve uredbe 365/2010.
Comments from Astra
Od ukrepa bi imeli korist izključno ti izdajatelji televizijskega programa na škodo izdajateljev televizijskega programa, ki uporabljajo druge platforme.
The privately owned satellite operator Astra considers that the Measure clearly constitutes State aid, is in breach of the principle of technological neutrality and would strengthen the dominant DTT platform operator Abertis.
Glede pravne ocene ukrepa se družba Astra ne strinja, da ukrep predstavlja izreden dogodek, ki bi upravičeval uporabo člena 107(2)(b) Pogodbe.
It considers Abertis as an indirect beneficiary of the Measure.
Ne strinja se niti z navedbo, da ukrep izpolnjuje zahteve člena 107(3)(c) Pogodbe, saj bi zaradi svojega tehnološko nenevtralnega značaja izkrivil konkurenco med operaterji platforme.
As for the impact of the Measure, Astra believes that notwithstanding its limitation to the simulcast compensation, in practice it would cover all expenses of broadcasters related to the release of the Digital Dividend.
V tem smislu družba Astra poudarja, da imajo neposredni upravičenci ukrepa jasno spodbudo za sočasno oddajanje brez nadomestila, da bi obdržali svoje občinstvo in prihodke od oglaševanja; ne da bi upoštevali njihove dodatne prednosti zaradi sprostitve digitalne dividende (ki npr. nudi možnost gledanja televizije prek mobilne telefonije v sproščenem pasu 800 MHz).
Astra agrees with the Commission that the obligation of private broadcasters to simulcast results from national law (regulatory measure) and as such does not trigger the right to compensation.
Družba Astra tudi trdi, da španski organi niso izdelali neodvisne študije, ki bi utemeljevala ukrep kot primerno, potrebno in sorazmerno pomoč.
According to Astra, the NTP provides that public authorities can establish special conditions for broadcasting not foreseen in the licences as a consequence of market regulation or technical development without the right to compensation.
Skratka, družba Astra podpira odprtje španskega televizijskega trga v območju I in omogočitev konkurence na podlagi prednosti med alternativnimi tehnološkimi platformami.
Astra also points to the fact that the DTT broadcasters were aware of the release of the Digital Dividend and the related transfer of frequencies before the adoption of Royal Decree 365/2010.
Pripombe družbe Abertis
The Measure would exclusively benefit these broadcasters, to the detriment of broadcasters using other platforms.
Podobno kot španski organi tudi družba Abertis ukrepa ne šteje za državno pomoč zaradi neobstoja selektivnih gospodarskih prednosti in izkrivljanja konkurence.
Concerning the legal assessment of the Measure, Astra disagrees that the Measure constitutes an exceptional occurrence that would justify the application of Article 107(2)(b) of the Treaty.
Če bi se Komisija odločila ukrep opredeliti kot državno pomoč, bi ga morala označiti za združljivega na podlagi člena 107(3) Pogodbe.
It also disagrees that the Measure fulfils the requirements of Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty, as it would distort competition between platform operators due to its non-technologically neutral character.
Družba Abertis navaja, da glede na izbiro tehnologije, ki jo izdajatelji televizijskega programa uporabljajo med sočasnim oddajanjem, ne bi imela niti koristi niti izgub.
In this respect, Astra highlights that the direct beneficiaries of the Measure have clear incentive to simulcast without compensation in order to keep their audience and publicity revenues; not taking into account their additional advantages from the release of the Digital Dividend (e.g. which offers the possibility to view TV through mobile telephony on the freed 800 MHz band).
Po njenem mnenju bi nadomestilo za sočasno oddajanje lahko celo povečalo konkurenčnost med platformami v korist trga radiodifuzije in potrošnikov.
Astra also argues that the Spanish authorities have failed to produce an independent study justifying the Measure as appropriate, necessary and proportionate aid.
Družba Abertis zagovarja učinkovitost tehnologije DTT, vendar se ne strinja, da bo uporaba te tehnologije med sočasnim oddajanjem določila platformo, ki jo bodo izdajatelji televizijskega programa uporabljali v prihodnosti.
In conclusion, Astra favours the opening of the Spanish TV market in Area I and allowing competition on the merits between alternative technological platforms.
Po drugi strani družba Abertis priznava, da se bo signal DTT še naprej prenašal izključno prek tehnologije DTT pod pogoji, vsebovanimi v licencah izdajateljev televizijskega programa.
Comments from Abertis
Skratka, družba Abertis se ne strinja s predhodnimi zaključki Komisije o ukrepu.
Similarly to the Spanish authorities, Abertis also does not qualify the Measure as State aid due to the lack of selective economic advantage and distortion of competition.
Pripombe EBU
If the Commission would decide to qualify the Measure as State aid, it should declare it compatible under Article 107(3) of the Treaty.
Ukrep tudi po mnenju EBU ne predstavlja državne pomoči.
Abertis informs that it would neither benefit nor loose from the choice of technology used by broadcasters during simulcast.
Če bi se Komisija odločila ukrep opredeliti kot državno pomoč, bi ga morala označiti za združljivega na podlagi člena 107(3) Pogodbe, saj upošteva načelo tehnološke nevtralnosti.
It considers that the simulcast compensation could actually increase competitiveness between the platforms to the benefit of the broadcasting market and consumers.
EBU poziva Komisijo, naj oceno omeji na dejanski namen in vplive ukrepa, tj. zagotovitev sočasnega oddajanja med postopkom prenosa DTT v kontekstu sprostitve digitalne dividende.