[Ecommerce] EU Commissioner Reding- Harmonise IPRs

[Michelle Childs]

Below is a long speech from Commissioner Reding two points jump out

1) innovation is not sufficiently rewarded in Europe. For Commissioner
Reding innovation only appears valuable if it is explioted 'economically
and ideally the R@D is carried out by private rather than public
institutions. She does not appear to see the irony of using examples such
as the World Wide Web and Linux as failures to exploit innovation. While
of course there is a the need for Europe to have successful ICT companies
the different ways  that this could happen appear to pass her by and the
only model to copy is the US.

<snip> 'First, innovation is not sufficiently rewarded in Europe. We have
great European researchers and innovators =96 but rarely, European
innovations are also exploited economically in Europe. While key
inventions such as the World Wide Web, the MPEG 3 audio compression
technology or Linux were invented in Europe, industrial applications
resulting from these inventions are more and more developed elsewhere. Too
often, innovation and industrial exploitation seem not to go hand in hand
in Europe, while this is self-evident in the US. '

2)National differences in IPR laws should be removed. In theory the
Copyright Directive should have led to harmonisation across Europe, but
there are still national differences. She thinks these should go. This is
important as the Commission ( DG Internal Market) is reviewing the IPR
Aquis this year. Many civil society groups would like certain exceptions
harmonised across Europe(under the Copyright Directive exceptions are
optional). However, my hunch from past statements is that Commissoner
Reding will be looking at this from the industry perspective- and they
don't want many of the exceptions that benefit libraries, people with
diabalities and private copying.
< SNIP>

'Even though we all know that there cannot be a strong content industry
without robust protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), we have
in Europe not one, but still 25 different regimes of IPR protection. It is
true that we have made some progress with EU-harmonisation of copyright
rules in the past years and made first steps towards harmonised copyright
protection in Europe. However, this still has not allowed the creation of
a single European market for content. The main obstacle for this is that
IPR, and in particular copyright, continues to be closely linked to
national territories inside the EU. That content is licensed still at
national level, and not for the entire EU. That collecting societies stick
close to national territories in their daily work, and that they also do
so with regard to online licensing.'

http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=3DSPEECH/06/28&=
format=3DHTML&aged=3D0&language=3DEN&guiLanguage=3Den


Viviane Reding
Member of the European Commission responsible for Information Society and
Media

A =93Triple Play=94 for Europe

Digital Lifestyle Day 2006
Munich, 23 January 2006


Ladies and Gentlemen,

You have asked me to introduce, with my speech, today=92s debate with
business leaders of the Internet economy on =93Europe=92s Catch-Up=94. But
before we start talking about the need for us Europeans to catch up, let
me first look at the reasons why we have to catch up. In such a wealthy
town like Munich one tends to take for granted that the economic success
of our societies has always been, and still is, the result of strategic
decisions, innovation and hard work.

The need for a mentality change

The first reform that we Europeans need to catch-up is a reform of our
mentality. Too often I see pessimism and fear dominate political talks in
Europe. Pessimism about the possibility of keeping our wealth. Fear of
globalisation. Fear even of our neighbours. In France, the fear of the
famous =93Polish plumber=94 has even led to a rejection of the new European
Constitutional Treaty, which would have made Europe stronger with regard
to the challenges of globalisation =96 and this even though there are not
more than 120 plumbers of Polish nationality in the whole of France.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Have we forgotten what European integration is all about? Have we
forgotten all the jobs created by opening up Central and Eastern European
markets for products from Western European countries? And have we really
already forgotten that just two decades ago, we would have wholeheartedly
welcomed every Eastern European coming westward with expertise or a tool
box instead of with a machine gun? The disclosure of the archives of the
Warsaw Pact in these days should remind us how much confrontation was a
reality in Europe when it was still divided by the Cold War, and how
grateful we therefore should be for today=92s peaceful unification of the
European family.

Let me give you a further example for the urgently needed mentality change
in Europe. In Austria, I am hearing every day the outcry of politicians
against a ruling of the European Court of Justice from last year. This
judgement said that German students have to be admitted to Austrian
universities in the same way as Austrian nationals. =93There are more
Germans at the University of Graz than there are Austrians in the whole of
Germany=94, some politicians in Austria are lamenting. But what is really a=
t
stake? Is this story not first of all a proof of the high quality of the
University of Graz? Has not also the PISA study proven the high standard
of the Austrian education system, compared with the German one? So could
not the problem be solved by requiring tests before enrolment? But then we
have to accept that we need to give real autonomy to universities and this
not only in speeches!

This is the kind of problem we face in Europe everywhere: we too often do
not have the courage to ask the relevant questions.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I firmly believe that therefore a reform of mentality in Europe is the
first and most important pre-condition for catching-up with our
competitors. I have just come back from China, and I recommend to all
those who fear competition from our European partners to look closely at
this country. There, the average growth rate only of the industry sector
which I know best, the industry specialised in Information and
Communication Technologies (ICT) is forecasted to exceed 20% in the next
five years. Europe cannot afford any longer to be paralysed by our fear of
the =93Polish plumber=94 and the =93German student=94.

It is certainly not enough if politicians say poetic words about Europe
only in their Sunday speeches, and then resort to nationalism and populism
in their weekly decisions. We Europeans must understand once and for all
that only together, and by combining our efforts, we will be able to
ensure the continuation of our European success story in a globalised
world. And that we must more often than in the past have the courage to do
something together that we cannot do any longer on our own.

Re-discovering Europe=92s strength

To make this mentality change possible, we Europeans must first of all
re-discover our strength. Just look at the ICT and media sector, for which
I am responsible in the European Commission. Here, we have a sector of the
economy that is still doing well, and we should not forget to say this
loudly. If there is an area where Europe has the potential to catch up,
and where often Europe already is the point of reference for other parts
of the world, it is the ICT and media sector.

The ICT sector alone accounts for 5.3% of Europe=92s GDP and for 3.4% of
total employment. In the period 2000-2003, the ICT sector contributed to
more than 25% of Europe=92s productivity growth. It is also a highly
innovative sector, responsible for more than a quarter of total effort in
European R&D effort and capable of creating growth and jobs.

Let me give you some concrete examples of the strength of Europe=92s ICT an=
d
media industries:

On the infrastructure side, broadband take-up is progressing fast in
Europe. There are today more than 50 million broadband connections in the
EU, an increase of nearly 60% in the last 12 months. Nordic countries top
the list of best performers, with Denmark, Finland and Sweden achieving a
penetration rate of about 20% of population, which means about 40% of
households. This is twice the European average, it is above the US average
and it is also not far from the South Korean rate. It does not come as a
surprise that the =93Europeans of the North=94 also come in top positions i=
n
international competitiveness rankings. In the World Economic Forum=92s
Country Ranking 2005-2006, Finland comes first, followed by the US,
Sweden, Denmark and Taiwan.
On the content side, Europe=92s strong cultural heritage provides a sound
basis for a strong European content industry, which has today a share of
29% of the world market, which is worth $ 130 billion, even though still
made up to a considerable extent by the strength of Europe=92s printed
media.
If we compare the turnover of companies in the ICT and media sector
worldwide, five European telecom companies make it easily into the Top Ten
(Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom, Telecom Italia, British Telecom and
Telef=F3nica). The list of the ten strongest companies producing ICT
hardware is even led by a European company (Nokia) and includes four
further European companies. The Top Ten of media content companies
includes at least three European companies (Vivendi Universal, Bertelsmann
and ARD).
For me, all this clearly is not a reason for pessimism or frustration but
a good basis for Europe catching up.

Three challenges for Europe=92s ICT and media industry

Of course, we also have to be honest about the challenges which Europe=92s
ICT and media sector needs to face in order to keep and expand its
position. There is no time for complacency in a rapidly evolving world.
For me, three challenges appear to be particularly important for the
competitiveness of Europe=92s Information Society.

First, innovation is not sufficiently rewarded in Europe. We have great
European researchers and innovators =96 but rarely, European innovations ar=
e
also exploited economically in Europe. While key inventions such as the
World Wide Web, the MPEG 3 audio compression technology or Linux were
invented in Europe, industrial applications resulting from these
inventions are more and more developed elsewhere. Too often, innovation
and industrial exploitation seem not to go hand in hand in Europe, while
this is self-evident in the US. And too often still, public research and
development spending is not used efficiently in Europe, but is misdirected
though bureaucratic procedures and red tape.
A second challenge of Europe=92s Information Society is the lack of speed i=
n
our networked economy. Consumers will only become really interested in
eCommerce, Voice over IP or TV over IP if using the Internet becomes a
truly seamless experience. If the message =93Please wait until download
completed=94 does no longer appear on our mobile or screens. If being onlin=
e
is always a real time experience. This requires speed in our networks. It
is true that speeds are increasing in Europe, but there are still few
connections with bandwidth above than 3 Megabit per second. Contrast this
with Japan: there, already more than 10% of the 15.4 million broadband
subscribers are connected via fibre optic with downlink rates of up to 26
Megabit per second. Here, indeed, we have to catch up as regards the
results, not necessarily as regards the method.
A third challenge is Content. I remember the origin of the Internet
economy when Thomas Middelhoff, who will speak after me, always stressed
that =93Content is king=94 if the Internet economy is to unfold. We all hav=
e
made our experiences since then, as has the =93New Economy=94 itself, but t=
his
key phrase is today more true than ever before. Let=92s be realistic: Even
though technological development will allow to have high-speed networks
reaching most of Europe in a couple of years, no consumer will be
interested just in the =93pipes=94 if they do not offer attractive content,
such as films, sport, games, or innovative services. With regard to
content, Europe however has a huge structural competitive disadvantage:
Even though we all know that there cannot be a strong content industry
without robust protection of intellectual property rights (IPR), we have
in Europe not one, but still 25 different regimes of IPR protection. It is
true that we have made some progress with EU-harmonisation of copyright
rules in the past years and made first steps towards harmonised copyright
protection in Europe. However, this still has not allowed the creation of
a single European market for content. The main obstacle for this is that
IPR, and in particular copyright, continues to be closely linked to
national territories inside the EU. That content is licensed still at
national level, and not for the entire EU. That collecting societies stick
close to national territories in their daily work, and that they also do
so with regard to online licensing. It is certainly not a lack of
creativity that makes Europe=92s content industry weak. But how can we
expect the European Information Society to unfold if content still cannot
fully profit in Europe from a similar large market without obstacles as in
the US?
The =93Triple Play=94 Europe Needs

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I do not believe that it is the task of politicians to develop business
models. In particular in the ICT and media sector, I strongly believe in
innovative entrepreneurs to strengthen Europe=92s competitiveness and enric=
h
Europe=92s Information Society with their products and services. I believe
that it is your role as entrepreneurs to develop an economy in which
European consumers will be able to profit from innovative services, fast
networks and rich content, and from the famous Triple Play of TV, Voice
and Internet that we all will certainly be able to access in our
households and offices in the near future.

The role of politicians, including European politicians, in this respect
is nevertheless important. We can create the right framework that will
rather promote than prevent Europe=92s Information Society to flourish. We
can facilitate progress, instead of blocking it. We can in particular be
in the lead with starting the mentality change which I was referring to in
the beginning of my remarks.

It is in this sense that I call for a political Triple Play for Europe to
allow Europe=92s digital economy to catch up with its competitors. This
political Triple Play must consist in my view of three elements:
Innovation, Investment and Integration

First, Innovation. Of course, it is not for policy makers to replace
private sector innovations in the digital economy. Even though some
politicians still feel tempted, it is not policy-makers that do
ground-breaking fundamental research. It is not policy makers who will
build a European search engine to compete with Google. Those who still
believe in the recipes of 19th century industrial policy interventionism
must only look into the public purse, whether at national or at European
level, to see that the financing of innovative projects cannot and should
not be driven 100% by the public sector any longer. What the public sector
can do instead is use the European taxpayers=92 money wisely by giving at
the right moment the right signals and the right incentives. With our EU
research programmes, we should in my view promote a new culture of
innovation where innovation does not rely primarily on public money; where
long-term financing by public authorities is replaced by venture capital,
and thus promotes and does not stifle innovation; where red-tape in
European and national research programmes is cut, so to make them more
accessible to the small, innovative start-ups, and not only to established
conglomerates or research institutions which are able to hire 20 lawyers
to fill in all required forms. This week, the European Commission will
evaluate the reform programmes of all 25 national governments, and I will
take a particularly close look to see whether they promote this new
culture of innovation in the field of ICT.

The second element of the Triple-Play Europe needs is Investment, and this
concerns in particular the infrastructure of the digital economy. To equip
Europe=92s digital economy with high-speed networks will without any doubt
require substantial private sector investment. Here, Europe has a unique
responsibility to make sure that the regulatory framework encourages, and
does not discourage, such investment by as many investors as possible. For
me, it is clear that those who invest in new networks must be able to also
reap a reasonable return on investment. However, that can, in my view, not
mean that regulators exempt those who build such networks from the rules
which guarantee effective competition. I believe in innovative business
models, but not in so-called =93natural monopolies=94 in a dynamic sector s=
uch
as the ICT and media sector. I welcome that here in Germany, there are now
several players interested in investing in new high-speed networks, and I
call on the German telecom regulator to ensure that the relevant access
obligations under EU rules are fully complied with.

Otherwise, the German consumer will have to pay the price in a couple of
years, lose interest and then turn his back to the so promising world of
the digital economy. To find the right balance between investment and
competition will certainly keep us busy for the rest of the year when we
review the EU telecom rules. I hope that in particular the German
government will participate actively in this debate at EU level and not
give in to the pressure to find unilaterally a solution at national level
which could only yield benefits at national level in the short term, but
would create fundamental problems, both at national level and EU-wide, in
the long run. It is essential to remember that electronic communications
markets are becoming more and more European. More and more companies from
one EU Member State are starting to invest in other EU countries. The EU
Commission has always supported this process as it promotes both
investment and competition. It is absolutely crucial that we all
understand that this is a European process, and that the European
Commission cannot tolerate fragmented national approaches which may favour
only the former national incumbents and could thereby block competition
and the development of a true European market for electronic
communications.

Finally, as the third element for Europe=92s political Triple Play, I see a
clear need for further Integration. With this, I mean the need for further
integrating markets in Europe. For the digital economy, we need in
particular to make substantial progress towards a European market for
services, including electronic services. In my field of responsibility, I
have already proposed in December last to further strengthen the European
market for audiovisual media services with a modernised =93Television
without Frontiers=94 Directive. The new Directive aims to liberalise
advertising rules in Europe and therefore takes into account the
importance of advertising as an economic foundation of free-to-air media
content. At the same time, the modernised Directive aims to create an
internal market framework for new audiovisual on-demand services, thus
allowing, for example, a video-on-demand provider in Britain to deliver
his services to all 25 EU Member States on the basis of UK law only, and
without the need to respect at the same time 24 other legal regimes. To
make sure that online media services can fully reap the benefits of a
market encompassing all 25 EU Member States, we will finally need to
reflect further on moving to a European regime of IPRs. If Europe=92s
content industry really wants to be able to compete with other continents,
and if it really wants to become a driver of growth in jobs for the
digital economy, we have in particular to start calling into question the
territoriality of copyright protection in Europe. And move to a true
level-playing-field for content, encompassing the territory of all 25
EU-Member States as a single content space.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I know that many of what I just said will sound like heresy to some
experts and many politicians. The political =93Triple Play=94 which I propo=
se
for Europe=92s digital economy, and part of which is already on the way to
be put in practice at EU level, of course means also breaking with a
number of past traditions and common practice.

But in my view, some heresy is inherent in the mentality change that I
have called for in the beginning of my remarks. We need more courage and
more action than reaction if Europe really wants to catch-up in the ICT
field. And it is in this spirit that I am now looking forward to an
interesting, maybe also controversial discussion with you.

Thank you very much for your attention.







--
Michelle Childs -Head of European Affairs
Consumer Project on Technology in London
24, Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX,UK.
Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252.
Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607
http://www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA .Tel.:
+1.202.332.2670,Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727






--
Michelle Childs -Head of European Affairs
Consumer Project on Technology in London
24, Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX,UK.
Tel:+44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252.
Mob:+44(0)790 386 4642. Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607
http://www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology in Washington, DC
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA .Tel.:
+1.202.332.2670,Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology in Geneva
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727