Under the text of the proposed new Article 5 a, which is very similar to what the Parliament supported back in 2005, “the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising out of a violation of privacy or rights relating to the personality, including defamation, shall be the law of the country in which the most significant element or elements of the loss or damage occur or are likely to occur.” (Par 1). A new element, however, is that “the law applicable shall be the law of the country in which the defendant is habitually resident if he or she could not reasonably have foreseen substantial consequences of his or her act occurring in the country designated by paragraph 1.” (Par 2). Like the Parliament’s previous Resolution, it states “[w]here the violation is caused by the publication of printed matter or by a broadcast, the country in which the most significant element or elements of the damage occur or are likely to occur shall be deemed to be the country to which the publication or broadcasting service is principally directed or, if this is not apparent, the country in which editorial control is exercised, and that country’s law shall be applicable…” (Par 3). For further details see the full report below under documents.

The report also asks the Commission to submit a proposal for the creation of a centre for the voluntary settlement of cross-border disputes arising out of violations of privacy and rights relating to personality, including defamation, by way of alternative dispute resolution.It is important to note that the suggestions put forward in the original JURI Committee report drafted by Diana Wallis MEP (who is no longer an MEP) would have be disastrous for magazine publishers. Fortunately, a combination of lobbying by EMMA in conjunction with a broader coalition of media organizations (AER, EBU, ENPA, EPC, IFJ) together with the important work of VDZ (Christoph Fiedler’s good contacts and experience of working on Rome II were key to the tabling of an excellent amendment by MEPs Lehne and Gallo), shaped the final positive outcome (see the report attached).

Another key success factor was the change in Rapporteur. Cecilia Wikstrom (ALDE/SW), that many of you know from EMMA meetings and events, has always been very supportive on press freedom issues and was very supportive of our position on Rome II. Following the adoption of the report in the JURI Committee, she has subsequently written to EMMA and the other media organizations that worked together on this issue to thank us for our contributions to her work on the Rome II dossier, which she said was “invaluable”. She does not consider her work on this topic to be over with this plenary vote, however, but sees it rather as the beginning of a process where she would like to see likeminded people working together to inform member states as well as the Commission of the value of tackling this issue in “a reasonable way.”

NEXT STEPS:

• Mrs Wikstrom has invited EMMA, along with other media organizations, to discuss the establishment of a small informal network of people in Brussels (“friends of ending libel tourism”) to discuss this issue further. She is keen to gather information on what the positions are on this topic in the 27 member states, and to discuss what can be done “to move them in a good direction.”
• As we understand, the Commission is set to look into this issue again in 2013
• This is something that EMMA will be discussing further with members at our forthcoming Legal Affairs Committee on 14 June.

DOCUMENTS:

• European Parliament report with recommendations to the Commission on the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II): click here
• Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Catherine Starkie (catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

NEXT STEPS:

Following a meeting between ICOMP(Initiative for a competitive online marketplace) representative David Wood and EMMA’s new chairman of the Publishing Online Group, Claudio Giua, Director for Development and Innovation at Gruppo Editoriale l’Espresso, Italy, the understanding is that the European Commission will most likely launch a full investigation following the publication of the statement of objections.It is important that our sector gives full support to European Commission Almunia for a full investigation, the moment he makes his decision public. Publishers can expect a commitment from Google to eliminate the abuse of its dominant position. The Commission has the power to fine companies up to 10% of their global turnover if they are found to contravene EU rules.

DOCUMENTS:

Documents for further reading on this issue:

• ICOMP paper titled “Google under the antitrust microscope” which gives a good insight to the current Google antitrust case: click here
• European Commission investigation timeline: click here
• ICOMP briefing document on the significance of a statement of objections: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact: Max von Abendroth (max.abendroth@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 04)

The hearing organised by the Commission’s DG Internal Market and Services, follows a Public Hearing which EMMA attended in June last year, and an earlier public consultation on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC in 2010, which EMMA (as FAEP) responded to.

The Commission said that before doing an assessment it was necessary to set out objectives: the question was whether IPRED had been “fit for purpose” in meeting the objectives set out in the general obligations under Article 3 of IPRED:(1) “Member States shall provide for the measures, procedures and remedies necessary to ensure the enforcement of the intellectual property rights covered by this Directive. Those measures, procedures and remedies shall be fair and equitable and shall not be unnecessarily complicated or costly, or entail unreasonable time-limits or unwarranted delays. (2) Those measures, procedures and remedies shall also be effective, proportionate and dissuasive and shall be applied in such a manner as to avoid the creation of barriers to legitimate trade and to provide for safeguards against their abuse.”

The Commission said that questions it would look at would include some of those raised at the hearing. For example:

• Accessibility to civil redress (although this is not covered in IPRED)
• Evaluation of damages
• Injunctive relief
• The role of intermediaries that are not infringing intellectual property (“collaboration has to work”)
• Judicial review was noted as important
• It was also noted as a “real issue” that SMEs are not able to enforce

NEXT STEPS:

• The Commission will publish a summary report of the hearing this month
• The Commission will shortly issue another questionnaire on some of the themes that have arisen.
• EMMA, having recently shared the key findings of its copyright infringement survey with the Commission, will continue to maintain its good contacts.

DOCUMENTS:

• Directive 2004/48/EC (“IPRED”): click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Catherine Starkie (catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

The Responsible Marketing Pact, building on industry initiatives to date, foresees the implementation of self-regulatory rules as industry standards and extends the current self-regulatory rules to social media. The Pact has the ambition to:

• Prohibit alcohol marketing communications that might be particularly appealing to minors.
• Limit undue exposure of minors to drinks ads across all media, by fixing a common standard that ads may only be placed in media where at least 70% of the audience is reasonably expected to be above the legal purchase age.
• Prevent minors (people under the legal purchase age) from inadvertently seeing alcohol marketing communications on social media. This requires setting common standards for effective age-controls online, Facebook sponsored stories, user-generated content, etc.

Mid April, WFA proudly presented the outcome of the industry joint efforts in the form of commitments to the European Alcohol and Health Forum. However, the approach chosen, which is based on self-regulatory principles, failed to convince the numerous NGO members of the Forum. In a press release published the day before the Forum’s plenary, 28 European and national NGOs vehemently criticized the Pact:

“It cannot be left to the producers of a harmful product to decide how, when and where it will be marketed. Policy makers must not rely on self-regulation, but rather follow up through more statutory measures to protect the consumers. The content of this pact is basically the old ineffective measures of self-regulation in a new package. What we are witnessing are two powerful industries formally coming together to fight regulation- this is alarming”.

After complaining about the inefficiency of self-regulation to protect children and youth, the letter concludes by calling on the European Commission and governments to “take binding decisions to address the alcohol related harm in the new EU Alcohol Strategy”.

The industry coalition therefore was not surprised that NGOs called for a regulation of alcohol advertising also during the plenary of the EU Alcohol and Health Forum. Interestingly, through several interventions, it became clear to the participants that the intention of the youth organizations is to completely ban marketing communications and ideally even the sale of alcohol beverages.

The industry coalition complained about the aggressive reactions of the NGOs and about two partial reports they drafted, without giving advertising and alcohol organisations the possibility to comment on them ahead of their publication.

The European Commission, represented by Mrs Despina Spanou – principal advisor of the Director General of DG Health and Consumer Protection Mrs Paola Testori – did not take a position in favour of the industry, whereas the previous month the Commissioner for Health and Consumer policy, John Dalli, had made a supportive statement on the self-regulation system at EASA’s 20th anniversary.

NEXT STEPS:

The Commission will decide by the end of the year if it wants to continue with a voluntary approach to tackle alcohol-related harm. Should it decide otherwise, there is concern that a more binding approach could potentially be along the lines of what is already in place for the tobacco industry.

DOCUMENT:

Commitment of WFA: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Amandine Labé (amandine.labe@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 08)

The “Independent Study on Indicators for Media Pluralism in the Member States – Towards a Risk-based approach” as well as being problematic due to specific indicators it established, is also problematic in of itself because you cannot rely on quantitative criteria to evaluate a cultural phenomenon such as the press and, furthermore, because pan-European criteria set at European level cannot reflect the differences in culture and traditions that exist in the media of 27 Member States. The problems of media freedom and pluralism in specific Member States, which are in most cases linked to bad enforcement of existing rules, are not a reason for the EU to start regulating the whole media sector at European level. The solution is rather to encourage Member States to correctly implement national media laws and journalists to correctly implement self-regulatory codes.

EMMA underlined at the time of the discussion on the study that it is the competence of the Member States to deal with media pluralism. In particular, we opposed any EU-level action in the areas of media ownership, concentration and pluralism beyond the rules of competition that already exist. Indeed, we highlighted that in many cases, it is safe economic thinking to reduce overheads and gain professional leadership by merging publishing houses into one company, which does not lead to a diminution of freedom of expression and diversity of opinions within this one company.We felt that the proposed Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) tool was potentially misleading and could be used by the European Commission to compare markets, which would be clearly outside of EU competence. The efforts to support media pluralism should, rather, be left to the national authorities in discussion with the media and their owners

Moreover, the tool proposed a subjective analysis of media content that would unlikely reflect the realities of the media market, and we had several concerns about specific risk indicators.

Finally, we feared that the independence of application of the study could not be guaranteed. Therefore, we called on the European Commission not to publish this study. In fact, the study was published but it was never used (quite possibly because the Commission understood that such criteria were inappropriate in the media sector).

At a recent meeting with MEP Tavares (Greens/Portugal) on a different topic, however, EMMA discovered that a group of MEPs, led by Tavares, called on the Commission to put in place this tool. While the Commission recently rejected this request, MEP Tavares has made it clear that he will re-submit the same request next year.

NEXT STEPS:

EMMA will input into his preparatory work by giving the MEP our feedback on the tool.

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Amandine Labé (amandine.labe@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 08)

In particular, the proposal introduces statutory requirements for the press. Moreover, neither the Commission’s proposal nor the draft report by rapporteur Arlene McCarthy (S&D/UK) in the European Parliament recognize the importance of self-regulatory codes for journalists when reporting about financial issues.EMMA, jointly with ENPA and EPC, is trying to get amendments tabled in order to limit the requirements for the press, mentioning self-regulation and improving the wording to prevent any misinterpretation of the text which could threaten freedom of reporting. The vote in Committee is expected on 9 July 2012.

The Commission wants to implement simple tools that educate and empower children, without impacting Internet freedom. Actions to deliver a Better Internet for Children are organised around 4 pillars and will harmonise the protection of children using online services across Member States. They include the introduction of transparent default age-appropriate privacy settings, user-friendly parental controls and standards for advertising on websites for children. An industry coalition of Internet companies is preparing solutions to empower parents and children, to be presented before the end of the year.

For the Memo, please click here

The VAT Communication from the Commission, published in December 2011, recognized the necessity to review the list of reduced rates in particular to take technological changes into account: “Similar goods and services should be subject to the same VAT rate and progress in technology should be taken into account in this respect, so that the challenge of convergence between the on-line and the physical environment is addressed.”

This guiding principle is a crucial element for publishers as it could open the way for Member States to maintain the reduced, super-reduced and zero rates they have on print and to extend these rates to magazines on all platforms. However, this element needs to be accepted by all Member States who are not very favourable to an extension of the list of reduced rates in the current economic context.According to our intelligence, the upcoming Council Conclusions are likely to be general and probably neutral on the question of technological neutrality (e.g., the Council will “take note” of the Commission’s evaluation of the list of reduced rates). The single realistic objective is to hope that the neutral tone used in the draft conclusions will not be rejected.

Member States in favour of our position include France, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and also Italy, Spain, Cyprus, Greece (but these last countries are not pushing as they are reproached for having relaxed taxation policies that lead to budget deficits). Member States opposed to our position include Germany, the UK (and Denmark, which has to play a neutral role as they hold the rotating Presidency of the EU).Regarding publishers’ requests, in principle, Member States are not discussing the list of reduced rates in details now. We understand that they do not have a problem with the current list but rather with the extension of the list. According to what we have heard, it does not seem to be acceptable to have similar rates for all formats of digital magazines or newspapers as the products are considered too different from the print versions (with enriched content etc.). It is only the pdf or very similar versions of the print copies that seem to be acceptable.

Well informed about the state of play of the discussions and of the sensibilities of the various Member States, we drafted a joint letter that we sent to all permanent representations ahead of their discussion on the issue on 20 April. We will organise joint publishers meetings with the most supportive countries ahead of the Council conclusions. National associations are also invited to support the message by contacting their national ministries before the preparatory meeting of the Council’s meeting taking place on 10 May.

In parallel, we contacted the Commission’s services involved in inter-service discussions on VAT. These inter-service discussions aim at preparing the ground for the impact assessment expected this year. Representatives from DG Information and Society, whom we met on 23 April, confirmed that DG Taxation is particularly interested in statistics on our business models and that we should work on a definition of the digital press. We underlined the importance for DG INFSO to take a more political approach and argue in favour of the principle of reduced rates for the press. Nevertheless, facts and figures may be useful at a later stage. We will organise further meetings with DG Education and Culture and Internal Market in the coming weeks.

NEXT STEPS:

• 10 May: Coreper meeting to clarify the position of the Member States on the draft Council’s conclusions
• 15 May: Ecofin Council meeting where conclusions on the Commission’s VAT Communication should be adopted
• Second half of 2012: Impact assessment
• Second half of 2013: Commission proposal expected

DOCUMENTS:

Personalised letter sent to the permanent representations on 18 April: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact: Amandine Labé ( amandine.labe@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 08)

Please find herewith an outline of the EDAA’s tasks:

1. to achieve aspects of Best Practice for Online Behavioural Advertising in Europe, as detailed in the EASA Best Practice Recommendation for Online Behavioural Advertising (13 April 2011) and IAB Europe OBA Framework (18 July 2011);
2. to promote use of the OBA Icon, as a means for companies to communicate to consumers their adherence to the self-regulatory principles for OBA;
3. to administer the licence in Europe of an OBA Icon intended to show adherence to the self-regulatory principles regarding industry best practice enunciated in the European Principles Documents for Online Behavioural Advertising (“EASA Best Practice Recommendation on Online Behavioural Advertising” (v. 13 April 2011), the “IAB Europe EU Framework for Online Behavioural Advertising” (18 July 2011) and the “Technical Specifications for implementing the IAB Europe OBA Framework and EASA BPR in Europe” (v.1.0.);
4. to manage efficiently a licensing system for the swift and effective distribution of the OBA Icon across Europe, which shall include the possibility to national SROs/IABs (i) to act as intermediaries between EDAA and companies, wishing to licence the OBA Icon from a local agent rather than to deal directly with the EDAA; (ii) to sublicence the OBA Icon to companies who need to use it to demonstrate compliance with their national first-party self-regulatory framework;
5. to coordinate the maintenance and updating of a pan-European website for OBA-related issues (www.youronlinechoices.eu);
6. to decide on the selection and approval of compliance providers (companies that may act as technical integrators of the OBA Icon), industry-wide monitoring providers and third-party “auditors” (companies that may verify and certify that a licencee has complied with the obligations set out in the European Principles Documents) as outlined in point 1 above;
7. to provide technical support (a centralised helpdesk) to licencees implementing the OBA Icon;
8. to provide EDAA members with regular reporting on the use of the licence (exact scope of the reporting to be decided by the General Assembly);
9. to coordinate with similar third-country or international licence administration bodies (e.g. the US DAA), as necessary;
10. to provide effective means and procedures for remuneration of national SROs related to implementation and complaints handling regarding OBA.

EDAA will not be responsible for lobbying, complaint handling, and revision of the rules (IAB Europe OBA Framework or EASA Best Practice Recommendation on Online Behavioural Advertising), establishing the educational campaign or taking on any other task not specifically assigned to it.

On 13 April Director General Robert Madelin (DG INFSO) chaired another stakeholder roundtable to discuss the achievements of the industry alliance and the way forward for the self-regulatory approach that requires the backing of European politicians. At this meeting Robert Madelin welcomed the developments. His main doubts referred to the question of accountability and sanctions in case an icon is not used according to the code. The industry will come up with a convincing approach before the next OBA-Roundtable meeting on 14 June.

NEXT STEPS:

• The next stakeholder roundtable will take place on 14 June 2012 in Brussels

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Max von Abendroth (max.abendroth@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 04)

The European Commission adopted in 1999 a Directive to improve consumer information as regards the environmental performance of new passenger cars. The Directive requires information (on fuel economy and CO2 emissions) to be displayed through different channels including promotional literature, which covers print advertising.European Commission’s Directorate General for Climate Action commissioned a report on the implementation of the Directive to decide whether a revision of the text will be necessary or not. The study that has been published in March 2012 has been realised by three consultancy agencies: AEA (a global sustainability consultancy), TEPR (Transport and Environmental Policy Research) and KTI (passenger transport).

As you might remember, EMMA monitored and gave input to the work of the consultancies in charge of the report, highlighting that there should be no extension of the current provisions for print advertising in case of a revision of the Directive.

The reports analyses the situation in 8 Member States: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Romania, Spain and the UK as regards the implementation of the Directive and its enforcement. The report also includes a review of the policy options and more importantly makes a series of recommendations. The different aspects of the Directive have been covered in the report, which include the part on promotional literature that is relevant to the publishing industry. Please see our complete summary of the report in the attached documents.What are the recommendations?

The report makes recommendations to impose further obligations on advertisers. These obligations could impact their interest in publishing ads in magazines because of the potential negative message delivered by such far reaching labels. Most of these recommendations would require a revision of the Directive.

Of particular relevance to the publishing industry, the report made the following recommendations:

• “It could be considered to make the requirements in relation to promotional literature, as currently defined by the Directive, more prescriptive, including the addition of minimum requirements in terms of size and position (which could be different for different types of promotional material).
• It could be considered to update the definition of “promotional literature” to clarify it and to reflect the realities of the increasing use of electronic media (e.g. external electronic posters in public spaces).
• If the Directive is not revised, the production of guidance could be considered on the Commission’s understanding of what is meant in Annex IV by ‘easy to read’ and other commonly misinterpreted phrases.”
• “Investigate further whether there should be a requirement to provide information (…) on other types of road transport (including vans, heavy-duty vehicles, two- and three-wheelers and used cars).”
• “It could be considered to extend the provisions of the Directive to cover promotional material on the internet that is visual and static.”
• “Undertaking research, or even a trial, to understand whether there are any benefits in terms of increasing consumers’ awareness of extending the provisions of the Directive to cover other types of visual and dynamic media (including that on the internet) could be considered.”
• “Harmonize the requirements relating to label” (e.g.: Include information about taxation rate when connected to CO2 emission of the car; annual vehicle running costs)”

NEXT STEPS:

• The 250 page long report will be taken into account by the Commission during its review of the Directive, expected in the second half of 2013.
• EMMA will contact informally the cabinet of Mrs Hedegaard (Climate Action) in charge of the file to find out more about the Commission’s plans on a revision of the Directive and more specifically on the extension of the advertising provisions.

DOCUMENTS:

• Our summary of the report: click here
• The full report can be accessed on the following link: click here
• Directive 1999/94/EC Relating to the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions in respect of the marketing of new passenger cars: click here
• Comments of EMMA and ENPA to the report on the implementation of Directive 1999/94/EC : click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Amandine Labé (amandine.labe@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 08)

The modernisation and promotion of Convention 108, which is a priority for the Council of Europe, aims to deal with “challenges for privacy resulting from the use of new ICTs; and strengthen the Convention’s follow-up mechanism”. According to the Council of Europe, the objectives are “to maintain the general and technologically neutral nature of the Convention’s provisions with more detailed sectoral texts by way of soft-law instruments (opinions and recommendations); ensure for coherence and compatibility with the legal framework of the European Union; and reaffirm the Convention’s potential as a universal standard and its open character.”EMMA in its response, submitted jointly with ENPA, underlines that any amendment of the current Convention undertaken must find the right balance between the fundamental right of personal data protection and the fundamental right of freedom of expression. In particular (in line with our positioning in the EU debate on the proposed Data Protection Regulation) we stress that it is essential when making any changes to the current framework, to take into account the following:

• A robust exemption for processing of personal data for journalistic purposes is crucial to preserve editorial press freedom and safeguard a free and independent, quality press.
• The possibility for the press to continue to be able to reach out to potential as well as current subscribers via direct marketing is essential to safeguard press distribution for the consumer as well as the business to business press, in order to preserve readership, future press subscriptions and media pluralism.
• The future of the digital press must not be jeopardized: publishers have invested substantial resources in developing digital business models in recent years and a successful future depends on advertising and digital subscriptions, as well as e-commerce. It is therefore essential that there are no restrictions that will make it difficult for publishers to be able to interact easily with their readers, and adapt to their needs.

We have made various comments on specific proposals to revise the text. As regards press freedom, we have underlined that the application of data protection rules to journalistic data processing would make free and independent editorial coverage impossible in many cases, so for editorial freedom of the press a robust exception is needed from general data processing rules in order to allow for the processing of the information collected, storage in the editorial archives and the distribution of the finished articles and publications, including in digital form. Furthermore, this exception must be technology-neutral, covering all distribution channels and media types, and any activity associated with the press. We recommend that the exception proposed by the Council of Europe must therefore be extended to cover more Articles to ensure a similar level of protection to now.

As regards the marketing and distribution side of publishing businesses, we welcome the proposal that the four grounds set out for legitimate data processing include where there is “an overriding legitimate interest” and that consent of the data subject is one alternative, but not the only one.

NEXT STEPS:

• 2 May: There will be an exchange of views on the issue which EMMA and other stakeholders will attend at the Council of Europe’s offices in Brussels
• 19-22 June: approval of the draft text at the Plenary meeting of the Consultative Committee of the Convention 108 in Strasbourg.

DOCUMENTS:

• EMMA and ENPA joint response to Council of Europe Consultation on Convention 108 : click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact: Catherine Starkie (Catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

VAT Task Force, chaired by Marianne Berard-Quelin, chairman and CEO, editor in chief, of Société Générale de Presse (a french BtoB press company). Marianne is also vice president of the French Federation of the specialised Press (FNPS – Fédération nationalede la presse d’information spécialisée) and chairman of its Committee for the Europeanaffairs.

Publishing Online Group, chaired by Claudio Giua, Development and Innovation director of Gruppo Editoriale l’Espresso. Claudio is president of Premium Publisher Network, the consortium of the Italian Publishers for the contextual adv; digital advisor of Fieg (the Italian dailies and magazines Publishers Federation); president of Fondazione Sistema Toscana. As a journalist, he headed the political desk of la Repubblica and four local newspapers in Veneto and Tuscany.

• June 2012: meeting with Opinion giving committees (ITRE, IMCO, JURI, CULT) to see progress
• June/July: meeting with Presidency
• Autumn: hearing
• November: draft report from LIBE Committee
• Jan/Feb 2013: amendments to be discussed
• Mar/Apr 2013: LIBE Committee vote

Overview of Data Protection Rapporteurs and shadows in the European Parliament : click here

Via meetings with the Cabinet of Commissioner Kroes (Digital Agenda) and with key MEPs working on the case, EMMA has supported the efforts of Hungarian publishers at EU level by recalling the situation of the Hungarian press and expressing the urgent need for the Hungarian authorities enforce the decision of the Constitutional Court. Hopefully our combined efforts, jointly with EU and international pressure on the government, will soon positively impact the media law.

The advertising industry has suggested a compromise amendment highlighting its self-regulatory efforts. It seems to be the best possible outcome considering that the protection of children from advertising is a very sensitive issue in the Parliament. We will work separately on the other issues of relevance in the respective legislative proposals. The plenary vote on the report in will take place on 21 May.

The new Observatory, is not only tasked with giving out information on the real losses, problems and risks associated with counterfeiting and piracy, it also aims to create and build on relationships of co-operation which allow for collaboration and regular exchanges of information between stakeholders. This means sharing useful practices between Member States, public authorities and stakeholders engaged in enforcement of intellectual property rights.

Google Official Blog, April 20, 2012 “Spring-cleaning … in spring!”: click here

As Vice-President Kroes has a good understanding of the telecommunications sector and its impact on her policy area, the Digital Agenda, but lacks deeper insights into the content industry such as the press sector, the CEOs shared with her the trends of the magazine sector and provided her with some examples of how our sector is embracing the digital future.In this context the Future Media Lab. (http://www.futuremedialab.info/) initiative of EMMA was introduced to the Vice-President with the aim of complementing her recently-launched initiative, the Media Futures Forum, chaired by Christian van Thillo (De Persgroep, Belgium), with magazine related background information regarding business trends.

The meeting showed that she is interested to get more insights into the digital future of magazine publishing. She picked up on issues like the future of literacy, how employees adapt to the ongoing changes from print to digital, and how Europe can be competitive in the digital field with the US.

Legislative files that Vice-President Kroes is directly responsible for are the following:

• Net neutrality: it is expected that she will come up with a proposal before summer 2012; EMMA is lobbying for a non-discriminatory approach that allows users to access all content in the same way.
• Cloud computing: VP Kroes is to present in July 2012 her approach on cloud computing, that has implications for data-protection, security and copyright. This file is increasingly important to publishers as their business is changing and cloud computing will become a significant part of the business practice.
• Media pluralism: her team is preparing a European Commission initiative to ensure the diversity and independence of media across Europe. According to VP Kroes this umbrella project will provide solutions for the specific Hungarian situation with its media law.

In addition her Directorate General is steering the OBA debate and is closely linked to the self-regulatory approach the industry is taking with a transparent opt-out system from targeted advertising. The next Roundtable chaired by Director General Robert Madelin takes place on 13 April 2012.

The participants of the CEO delegation were: Kevin Hand, Chairman PPA and Hearst Magazines UK, Honorary Vice-President of EMMA, Jörg Mühle, Heise Verlag, Germany, Jean de Boisdeffre, Hearst International, France, Dick Molman, Sanoma Media, The Netherlands, Marianne Bérard-Quélin, Société Géneral de Presse, France, György Szabó, CEO Sanoma Media, Hungary, Dr. Christoph Fiedler, Director EU Affairs VDZ and Chairman of EMMA Legal Affairs Committee, Germany.

Regarding the details of the meeting with Commissioner Semeta, please read the next article.

CONTACT:

For more information contact: Max von Abendroth (max.abendroth@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 04)

The CEO delegation, accompanied by the new Chairwoman of EMMA VAT Task Force, Marianne Bérard-Quélin, did a fantastic job, managing to catch the interest of the Commissioner by presenting concrete examples of the challenges their businesses face in the digital environment.Mr Semeta asked numerous questions and obviously learned some new things regarding the digital future of the press and the specific needs for our sector when it comes to VAT. He recommended that we follow up with his Directorate General (‘DG TAXUD’), that is about to launch the impact assessment on VAT. His cabinet told us to provide facts and figuresas well as statistics that support our argumentation.This open and interactive meeting was the beginning of EMMA’s second round of actions at EU level.

Following the Commissioner’s recommendation, we will be in touch with DG TAXUD and gather national statistics on the publishing sector. Actions at national level remain as before of crucial importance, due to the fact that decisions on tax are required to be taken unanimously in the Council.

Moreover, EMMA is in regular contact with the Commission’s Directorate General for Information and Society and the Directorate General for Education and Culture in the context of inter-service meetings on VAT that prepare the ground for the impact assessment. The DGs are notably looking into the definition of similar goods and services that could benefit from the same VAT rates. The questions of relevance for publishers that will be discussed over the next months in these inter-service meetings relate to the cost structure of printed and digital magazines, the definition of the digital press, the business models and trends of publishing and to the consequences that a change of VAT rate would have on the development of the printed press.

We expect the list of goods and services benefiting from reduced rates to be shortenedand need to convince the Commission as well as the Member States that the reduced rates for the press should be maintained.A joint meeting with the other publishing associations in Brussels will take place this week in order to coordinate positions and next steps for actions.

NEXT STEPS:

• April 2012: EMMA will follow-up with DG TAXUD and the other Commission DGs preparing the ground for the impact assessment.
• 15.05.2012: The Council of Finance Ministers will adopt its conclusions on the VAT Communication.
• A tripartite Tax Platform meeting between the Commission, tax experts from the Member States and the business community will be organised this year (date to be confirmed).
• 2nd half of 2012: Impact assessment
• 2013: Policy proposal

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Amandine Labé (amandine.labe@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 08)

In our joint position paper with ENPA to politicians, we underline several important matters, which, if left unaddressed, will have inevitable negative consequences for the sector and ask for support on:

1. The need to maintain the possibility to contest enforcement of judgments on public policy grounds
2. The need to address ‘forum shopping’, regarding violation of privacy and rights related to the personality
3. The need for courts to have the possibility to make enforcement conditional on the provision of security

On the first point, while both the draft report for the JURI Committee authored by Rapporteur Tadeusz Zwiefka (EPP/PL) and discussions in the Council support the abolition of the exequatur procedure, they importantly support the possibility to challenge judgments on public policy grounds, which is essential for the press.

On the second point, the Commission has acknowledged the problem of forum shopping in its proposal to revise the Brussels I Regulation (under Recital 13). While we would not expect any support to further improve the operative part of the text as regards forum shopping, as this is politically unrealistic, we are content that there does not seem to have been particular opposition by MEPs to the clause which highlights this problem for the press. This point is however yet to be discussed by the Council.

On the third point – the need for the court with which an appeal is lodged to have the possibility to make enforcement conditional on the provision of such security as it shall determine – this is indispensable to ensure effective protection against judgments that are not compatible with the national ordre public, especially if one considers that a plaintiff could go bankrupt during the appeal process. We are therefore delighted that the Council seems to have recognised the need for this and is proposing to reintroduce this provision into the revised version of the Brussels Regulation. It is however important that MEPs also understand the importance of supporting this.

NEXT STEPS:

It is possible that a JURI Committee vote could take place on 31 May, but much depends on how the recently launched trialogue discussions between the Danish Presidency, the Parliament and Commission advance. EMMA will continue to be active on this issue.

DOCUMENTS:

• EMMA and ENPA joint position paper on the proposed revision of the Brussels I Regulation : click here
• MEP Zwiefka’s draft report for the JURI Committee : click here
• Proposed amendments by JURI committee :  click here
• Latest publicly available Council document : click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Catherine Starkie (catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

The Commission’s proposal is currently being analysed by the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs (‘ECON’) committee. EMMA, ENPA and EPC sent last week a letter to the rapporteur Arlene McCarthy (S&D/UK) highlighting publishers’ concerns:

• The use of a Regulation instead of a Directive could impact national press laws

Market manipulation is a complex issue that touches upon the core activities of financial journalism, which traditionally fall under media law and national self-regulation. The proposal to use a Regulation instead of a Directive to legislate this area would leave no margin of interpretation to the Member States which makes it difficult to respect their national laws and traditions as regards press freedom.

• Self-regulation is not explicitly mentioned as it was in the Directive

Whereas there are some references in the proposal to the respect of freedom of expression and information, Article 8 (1) (c) establishes new statutory requirements for the press that leave a margin of interpretation which could threaten the freedom of reporting.

Article 15 (1) would also be problematic if applied to journalists, as it requires presenting financial information objectively as well as the disclosure of interests by the person giving this recommendation. We therefore strongly recommended in our letter that a reference to self-regulation for the press is made in the text of the draft Regulation, as it was already the case in Directive 2003/6/EC.

• Protection of journalistic sources

The proposed Regulation would give to the competent authorities the possibility to have access to private premises and seize documents, including access to telephone and data traffic records (Article 17 and Recital 31). A reference to the respect of the protection of journalistic sources would be necessary to ensure that the investigative powers given to national competent authorities do not affect this important principle which is an essential part of press freedom in the different Member States.

EMMA will-follow up this letter by organizing meetings with the rapporteur and shadow rapporteurs in the ECON committee to ensure that publishers’ concerns are taken into account in the European Parliament’s report. EMMA will also continue monitoring the proposal for a Directive on “Criminal sanctions for insider dealing and market manipulation” that has been published in parallel to the proposal for a Regulation.

NEXT STEPS:

• April 2012: Draft report to be published in ECON
• 09.07.2012: Vote in ECON committee
• 22.10.2012: Vote in plenary (Indicative plenary sitting date)

DOCUMENTS:

• Proposal for a Regulation on insider dealing and market manipulation: click here
• Proposal for a Directive on Criminal sanctions for insider dealing and market manipulation: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact: Catherine Starkie (Catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

The objective of the Green Paper is to launch a broad consultation process with stakeholders to validate or contribute to the Commission’s analysis and to help identify the right way to improve market integration.

The Green Paper is clearly relevant for magazine publishers. In order to sell magazines cross-border and increase magazine and online digital media subscriptions, a transparent and simplified payment system for the consumer could help create consumer trust and confidence in undertaking online, card, mobile and cross border payments, and potentially result in more sales. EMMA has prepared a draft response explaining members’ thoughts on this issue, which it recently circulated to members of the Legal Affairs Committee. Subject to members’ feedback, this will be shortly sent to the Commission.

Should members wish to send individual contributions they can be sent to the following address by 11 April 2012 at the latest: markt-sepa@ec.europa.eu.NEXT STEPS:

• 4 May 2012: EMMA will attend a Commission organised stakeholder conference on card, internet and mobile payments
• As a follow-up to this Green Paper and on the basis of the responses received, the Commission is set to announce the next steps by the second quarter of 2012.
• Proposals, if applicable, will be adopted by the fourth quarter of 2012 or the first quarter of 2013.

DOCUMENTS:

Link to Green Paper: click here

CONTACT:

For more information contact : Catherine Starkie (catherine.starkie@magazinemedia.eu // Ph.: +32 2 536 06 02)

Jan Philip Albrecht (Greens /Ger) is the Rapporteur, while the shadows are Alexander Alvaro (ALDE/Ger); Axel Voss (EPP/Ger); Cornelia Ernst (EUL-NGL/Ger); Timothy Kirkhope (ECR/UK), with the S&D group still undecided. Sean Kelly (EPP/Ire) – who some EMMA members met over dinner last year, and has been supportive of our sector in the past – is the Rapporteur in the ITRE committee. 

Following the publication of the proposed Data Protection Regulation in January, EMMA has been preparing a short and longer position paper for its members and will soon circulate these.

Please find the full report on the following link: click here

EMMA, together with ENPA, has recently met various Member States representations to discuss this issue. EMMA has long argued that the Commission Proposal needs to be clarified in several areas to avoid publisher-owned works being copied and made available – with commercial benefits – without publishers’ knowledge, which would be detrimental to their businesses.

We were therefore happy that the JURI Committee vote supports allowing publishers to make available and reproduce orphan works contained in their own collections and archives. Furthermore, MEPs rejected an idea that would have allowed libraries to commercially exploit orphan works.

EMMA in its feedback for the study indicates that our preferred option would be to have the repeal of the Data Retention Directive. We also recognise however the importance of being able to address crime, so a ‘quick freeze’ of data is considered to be a less intrusive means of getting information, with disclosure only after a court ruling being a possible solution.

We also underline that in order to protect democracy and press freedom, any obligation of Member States to retain data must not affect the right of Member States to apply their constitutional and other legal principles as regards confidentiality in communication protected under basic rights such as press freedom and the confidentiality of sources.