The CA covers Art 2(14)-(15), Arts 23-24,
Art 30a and recitals 45-51. All
relevant AMs, including AMs 108, 322, 340, 345-346, 32, 227-228, 248, 263,
249-251, CULT 18, 20, 22-23, 2, LIBE 10, 13, 1, JURI 8 and all AMs to Art
2(14)-(15), Art 23 Title, Arts 23-24, and recitals 45-51, fall.
Recitals
(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an
open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content
and application providers and internet service providers. The principle of “net neutrality”
in the open internet means that traffic should be treated equally, without
discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of the sender,
receiver, type, content, device, service or application. As stated by the European Parliament resolution of 17
November 2011 on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe 2011/2866, the
internet's open character has been a key driver of competitiveness, economic
growth, social development and innovation – which has led to spectacular levels
of development in online applications, content and services – and thus of
growth in the offer of, and demand for, content and services, and has made it a
vitally important accelerator in the free circulation of knowledge, ideas and
information, including in countries where access to independent media is limited.
The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of
end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services
of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European
Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management
practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive
Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the
functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer
perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by
traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications.
These tendencies require clear rules at the Union level to maintain the open internet
and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual
Member States' measures.
(46) The
freedom of end-users to access and distribute information and (deletion)
content, run applications and use services of their choice is subject to the
respect of Union and compatible national law. This Regulation defines the
limits for any restrictions to this freedom by providers of electronic
communications to the public but is without prejudice to other Union
legislation.
(47) In
an open internet, providers of internet access services should,
within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet
access services, not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific
content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a
limited number of (deletion) traffic management measures. Such measures should be
technically
necessary,
transparent, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Addressing network congestion
should be allowed provided that network congestion occurs only
temporarily or in exceptional circumstances. National Regulatory Authorities should be
able to require that a provider demonstrates that equal treatment of traffic
will be substantially less efficient.
(48) Volume-based tariffs should be considered compatible
with the principle of an open internet as long as they allow end-users to
choose the tariff corresponding to their normal data consumption based on clear,
transparent and explicit information about the conditions and implications
of such choice. At the same time, such tariffs should enable providers of internet
access services to better adapt network capacities to expected data
volumes. It is essential that end-users are fully informed before agreeing to
any data volume or speed limitations and the tariffs applicable, that they can
continuously monitor their consumption and easily acquire extensions of the
available data volumes if desired.
(49) It
should be possible to meet end-user demand for services and applications
requiring an enhanced level of assured service quality (deletion). Such services
may comprise inter alia broadcasting, video-conferencing and certain health
applications. End-users should therefore also be free to conclude agreements on
the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service with
either providers of internet access services, providers of electronic
communications to the public or providers of content, applications or services.
Where
such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access, that
provider should ensure that the enhanced quality service does not cause
material detriment to the general quality of internet access. Furthermore,
traffic management measures should not be applied in such a way as to
discriminate between competing services.
(50) In
addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services
providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality
parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not
time-sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers
to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of
electronic communications (deletion) may also be necessary for
the provision of certain services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications.
(deletion)
Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic
communications (deletion) should therefore continue to be free to conclude
specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as
long as such agreements do not impair the general quality of internet access
service.
(51) National
regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are
effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To
this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting
obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of internet access services, other
providers of electronic communications and other service providers
and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high
quality which are not impaired by specialised services. In their
assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services,
national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such
as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and
effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds,
performance of internet access services compared with enhanced quality
services, and quality as perceived by end-users. National regulatory
authorities should establish complaint procedures providing effective, simple and readily
available redress mechanisms for end users and be empowered to impose
minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of internet
access services, other providers of electronic communications and
other service providers if this is necessary to prevent general
impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.
Articles
Article 2 –
Definitions
(14) “internet access service” means a
publicly available electronic communications service that provides connectivity
to the internet, and thereby connectivity between virtually all end points of the
internet, irrespective of the network technologies or terminal equipment used;
(15) “specialised service” means an electronic communications service optimised for specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, provided over logically distinct capacity and relying on strict admission control with a view to ensuring enhanced quality from end to end and that is not marketed or usable as a substitute for internet access service;
Article 23 - Freedom to provide and avail
of open internet access, and reasonable traffic management
1. End-users shall be free to access and distribute
information and content, run and provide applications and
services and use terminals of their choice, irrespective of
the end-user’s or provider’s location or the location, origin or destination of
the service, information or content, via their internet access service.
[2nd
subpar deleted]
2. Providers of internet access, of
electronic communications to the public and providers of content,
applications and services shall be free to offer specialised
services to end-users. Such services shall only be offered if the
network capacity is sufficient to provide them in addition to internet access
services and they are not to the material detriment of the availability or
quality of internet access services. Providers of internet access to end-users shall not
discriminate between such services.
[2nd
subpar deleted]
3.
This Article is without prejudice to Union or national legislation related to
the lawfulness of the information, content, application or services transmitted.
4. End-users shall be provided with complete information in
accordance with Article 20(2), Article 21(3) and Article 21a of Directive 2002/22/EC, including
information on any (deletion) traffic management measures applied that might
affect access to and distribution of information, content, applications and
services as specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this
Article.[1]
5. Within the limits of any contractually agreed data
volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services
shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking,
slowing down, altering or degrading specific content, applications or
services, or specific classes thereof, except in cases where it is necessary to
apply (deletion) traffic management measures. Traffic management
measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate and necessary to:
a) implement (deletion) a court order (deletion);
b) preserve the
integrity and security of the network, services provided via this network, and
the end-users' terminals;
d) prevent or mitigate the effects of
temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of
traffic are treated equally.
Traffic management measures shall not be maintained
longer than necessary.[2]
Without prejudice to
Directive 95/46, traffic management measures
shall
only entail such processing of personal data that is necessary and
proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph,
and
shall also be subject to Directive 2002/58, in particular with respect to
confidentiality of communications.
Providers of internet
access services shall put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient
procedures aimed at addressing complaints alleging breaches of this Article. Such
procedures shall be without prejudice to the end-users right to refer the
matter to the national regulatory authority.
Article 24 -
Safeguards for quality of service
1. In exercising their powers
under Article 30a with respect to Article 23, national
regulatory authorities shall closely monitor compliance with Article 23(5) and
the continued availability of non-discriminatory internet access services at
levels of quality that reflect advances in technology. They shall, in
cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects
on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall publish
reports on an annual basis regarding their monitoring and findings, and
provide those reports to the Commission and BEREC.
2. In order to prevent the general impairment of quality
of service for internet access services or to safeguard the ability of
end-users to access and distribute content or information or to run
applications, services and software of their choice,
national regulatory authorities shall have the power to impose minimum quality
of service requirements, and where
appropriate, other quality of service parameters, as defined by the national
regulatory authorities, on providers of electronic communications to the
public.
National regulatory
authorities shall, in good time before imposing any such requirements, provide
the Commission with a summary of the grounds for action, the envisaged
requirements and the proposed course of action. This information shall also be
made available to BEREC. The Commission may, having examined such information,
make comments or recommendations thereupon, in particular to ensure that the
envisaged requirements do not adversely affect the functioning of the internal
market. National regulatory authorities shall take the utmost account of the
Commission’s comments or recommendations and shall communicate the adopted
requirements to the Commission and BEREC.[3]
3. Within six months of adoption of this regulation, BEREC shall, after consulting stakeholders and in close cooperation with the Commission, lay down general guidelines defining uniform conditions for the implementation of the obligations of national competent authorities under this Article, including with respect to the application of traffic management measures and for monitoring of compliance.
Article 24a –
Review
The
Commission shall, in close cooperation with BEREC, review the functioning of
the provisions on specialised services and, after a public consultation, shall
report and submit any appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the
Council by [insert date three years after the date of applicability of this
regulation].
Article 30a
Supervision and
enforcement
1. National regulatory authorities shall have the
necessary resources to monitor and supervise compliance with this Regulation
within their territories.
2. National regulatory authorities shall make
up-to-date information on the application of this Regulation publicly available
in a manner that enables interested parties to have easy access to it.
3. National regulatory authorities shall have the
power to require undertakings subject to obligations under this Regulation to
supply all information relevant to the implementation and enforcement of this
Regulation. Those undertakings shall provide such information promptly on
request and in accordance with time limits and the level of detail required by
the national regulatory authority.
4. National regulatory authorities may intervene on
their own initiative in order to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
5. National regulatory authorities shall put in place
appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures to address complaints
alleging breaches of Article 23. National regulatory authorities shall respond
to complaints without undue delay.
6. Where a national regulatory authority finds that a breach of the obligations set out in this Regulation has occurred, it shall require the immediate cessation of such a breach.
[1] IMCO adopted text AM 42 – IMCO exclusive competence. “Reasonable” deleted as not used in 23(5), exclusive ITRE competence, as the word adds nothing.
[2] IMCO 43 (part)
[3] IMCO adopted text AM 45 – IMCO exclusive competence. IMCO text on complaint procedures addressed substantively identically in Art 30a. IMCO text on BEREC guidelines in Art 24(3), maintained by ITRE.
On 20 mar 2014, at 22:18, Meredith Whittaker <meredithrachel@google.com> wrote:Your take is really interesting, Patrik, and exactly the kind of knowledge I think RIPE and the broader technical community could inject into these processes.It has been injected, repeatedly, but the level of clue among the ones actually writing the text is too low. And too many lobbyists want this bad vague language.Would it make sense to do a quick write-up, explaining the technical difficulties/impossibilities of implementing what is currently (vaguely) defined in the draft, and requesting clarity and technical specifics?Unknown to me. I do not know where the text is at the moment.PatrikOn Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:Agree, but that VPN can not be delivered (over the same IP based
network) as internet access without the internet access being degraded.
That is what I read the text say. And my point is that what this results
in is that the customer of the internet access should continue to get
whatever service they bought, irrespectively if some VPN service or
whatever is transported in the same shared physical medium, L2 or L3
network.
If that is what the intention is, why do they not write that?
Patrik> *Genna Cabinet Sprl *
On 2014-03-20 00:30, Innocenzo Genna wrote:
> In my opinion, that kind of specialized services are a VPN. It’s no
> Internet.
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Innocenzo Genna> 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium> Email: inno@innogenna.it <mailto:inno@innogenna.it>
>
> Skype: innonews
> Twitter:@InnoGenna
> my music: www.innocenzogenna.com <http://www.innocenzogenna.com>
> <mailto:paf@frobbit.se>> ha scritto:>
>>
>>
>> On 2014-03-19 20:13, Gordon Lennox wrote:
>>> On 19 Mar, 2014, at 18:34, Innocenzo Genna <inno@innogenna.it
>>> <mailto:inno@innogenna.it>
>>> <mailto:inno@innogenna.it>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 15) “specialized service” means an electronic communications
>>>> service */optimized for /*specific content, applications or services,
>>>> or a combination thereof, */provided over logically distinct capacity
>>>> and relying on strict admission control from end to end/*. It is not
>>>> marketed or */usable/* as a substitute for internet access service;
>>>> [its application layer is not functionally identical to services and
>>>> applications available over the public internet access service;]
>>>
>>> And that, particularly if the specialised service uses IP, is the
>>> problem?
>>>
>>> And end-to-end means to a particular device or, more probably, an end
>>> network controlled by the service supplier.
>>>
>>> I stopped liking "end-to-end" sometime back.
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea what and how to implement technically what they talk
>> about as "specialices service that does not impcat...".
>>
>> In a packet based network, if the outgoing interface is not full, all
>> packets will be forwarded as soon as possible.
>>
>> If the outgoing interface is full, then one can either queue all packets
>> equally (M/M/1 queuing theory) or one can have multiple queues (M/M/N).
>> If one have a specialized service that have some special treatment, then
>> by definition that implies longer delay on other queues (as packets get
>> reordered).
>>
>> Now, there are some special cases as well where the _services_ sold can
>> be different (i.e. some business connection with some SLA that is higher
>> than some SLA for end users paying less).
>>
>> What I think is sad is that they did not stop at saying for example:
>>
>> - Each provider of a service is required to always deliver to their
>> customers the service they have promised to deliver. (Regardless of what
>> other services they deliver to other customers on the same network...)
>>
>> Not any silly end-to-end. No silly "specialized service" etc.
>>
>> Then in other paragraphs they already (if I remember correctly) have
>> wording about equal treatment, dominant provider of services etc.
>>
>> Patrik
>>
>--Meredith Whittaker
Program Manager, Google ResearchGoogle NYC