Culture ministers set to revisit old battle ground

Tussles over the ‘country-of-origin’ principle are likely to be one of the issues that upset the apple-cart at next week’s meeting of culture ministers (13 November). The principle, which will allow companies to operate across borders while only having to comply with the laws of their home country, is vital to opening up markets and raising levels of competitiveness in the broadcasting sector. A significant number of member states, however, are still finding it difficult to relinquish their sovereignty in this area.

Under current EU?broadcast legislation (Television Without Frontiers), the principle was only applied to traditional analogue services. Extension of the principle to on-demand broadcast services was one of the main reasons for the European Commission’s legislative update. Some would go so far as to say it was the raison-d’être of the review.

"The country-of-origin principle is a cornerstone of this directive," says German centre-right MEP Ruth Hieronymi, who is preparing the European Parliament’s opinion on the update. "We need the majority of member states to accept the country-of-origin principle. This has been difficult. Certain member states ask for security against abuse, for instance in the protection of minors. Some member states are asking for legal certainty to prevent abuses."

Abuses often come in the form of a practice known as ‘jurisdiction shopping’, where companies shop around for their preferred regulatory regime in order to circumvent stricter legislation in the target country. Thirteen countries, including Sweden, France, Belgium and Austria, have serious reservations about applying the country- of-origin principle across the board. Doing so, they believe, would sanction the abuses currently taking place.

To address their concerns, Parliament has devised, together with the Council of Ministers, safeguards that could prove to be controversial. In the present version of the text, countries whose stricter laws are being deliberately flouted can take their complaints to the Commission, which will then be able to decide which jurisdiction applies.

Some broadcasting companies will cry foul at what they see as a sacrificing of the country-of-origin principle. "You either have the country-of-origin principle in the directive or you don’t have it at all," says Ross Biggam, director-general of the Association of Commercial Television in Europe, which represents broadcasters such as BSkyB and Canal+. "We’re concerned that protectionist instincts in some countries could undermine the principle."

Nicola Frank, deputy head of the Brussels office of the European Broadcasting Union, believes that such worries are overblown. "You’d need to have serious reasons to overturn the principle," she says of the safeguards. "As long as services originate from within the EU you shouldn’t have major problems."

Countries such as the UK will strongly defend the country-of-origin principle next week. National broadcast regulator Ofcom suggests that co-operation between regulators would ensure that abuses are kept to a minimum. "We are confident that these problems can be overcome by regulators working together under the country-of-origin principle," says spokesperson Simon Bates.

The country-of-origin issue has proven to be controversial in the past. Free market hackles were raised earlier this year when it was dropped from the services directive. Old battles could well be revisited next week when the issue is discussed by EU culture ministers.

Tussles over the ‘country-of-origin’ principle are likely to be one of the issues that upset the apple-cart at next week’s meeting of culture ministers (13 November). The principle, which will allow companies to operate across borders while only having to comply with the laws of their home country, is vital to opening up markets and raising levels of competitiveness in the broadcasting sector. A significant number of member states, however, are still finding it difficult to relinquish their sovereignty in this area.