Activites

• 1995/11/23 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 1995/47
  • OJ L 281 23.11.1995, p. 0051
• 1995/10/24 Final act signed
• 1995/10/24 End of procedure in Parliament
• #1866
• 1995/07/24 Council Meeting
• #1854
• 1995/06/13 Council Meeting
  • 1854 summary

    The Council took note of the amendments to its common position adopted by the European Parliament at its plenary sitting on the same day, and of the favourable opinion on those amendments as expressed by Mr BANGEMANN. It called upon the Permanent Representatives Committee to prepare a Decision as soon as possible in order to obviate the formal conciliation procedure, which would hold up adoption of the Directive for several months.

• 1995/06/13 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T4-0281/1995 summary

    In adopting the Caudron report, the European Parliament amended the Council's common position. It stressed that operators of conditional access services should be entitled to earn a return on their investments and for the provision of services to broadcasters. It also provided for the possibility of appeal to an arbitration body or the national regulatory authority in the case of a dispute and highlighted the need for efficient anti-piracy legislation. It stressed that the 16:9 format should be the reference format for wide-format television services. Parliament also called for the following measures: - conditional access should not be limited to Pay-TV services; - Member States should take all the necessary measures to ensure that the operators of conditional access services and cable TV providers, who produced and marketed access services to digital television services, offered access to all broadcasters, on a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory basis, and keep separate financial accounts regarding their activity as conditional access providers; - all consumer equipment, for sale or rent or otherwise made available in the Community, should possess the capability to display signals that had been transmitted in clear; - the Commission should examine the implementation of this directive and the development of the market for digital television services throughout the European Union and submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council. �

• 1995/06/12 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    Mr CAUDRON pointed out that following the first reading the Council had adopted a number of the EP’s amendments. However, the text of the common position had quickly shown itself to be inadequate, particularly with regard to the conclusions concerning DVB (Digital Video Broadcasting). Thus, the holders of conditional access services could offer closed services subject to authorisation of other operators to use their systems. However, DVB sought to use a unique decoder that would be used with different access cards. Faced with two irreconcilable positions - pay channels and channels with a common interface - the rapporteur’s amendments represent a compromise for conditional access. In other words, they guarantee operators a return on their investment and they allow equal access for all broadcasters. The rapporteur was also in favour of efficient anti-piracy legislation. Commissioner Bangemann noted that consideration should also be given to the protection of intellectual rights and that a proposal on data protection was being discussed. He could take over Amendments Nos 1, 2 and 6 as well as Amendments Nos 3 and 4 provided that Amendment No 3 was seen as encouraging the Member States rather than obligating them and Amendment No 4 was correctly interpreted. Amendment No 5, which was the most important amendment as it established the principle of conditional access for all broadcasters, was also taken over by the Commissioner.

• 1995/05/31 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A4-0130/1995
• 1995/03/15 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #1823
• 1994/12/22 Council Meeting
  • 11536/1/1994 summary

    The common position incorporated four amendments which had been accepted by the Commission in its amended proposal. These primarily related to the following measures: - the introduction of a reference to the Directive on "television without frontiers"; - the inclusion of the term "advanced" to qualify the "television services"; - the need to adopt common standards for the digital transmission of TV signals and to mandate a recognized European standardization body to carry this out; - conditional access. In addition the Council introduced amendments which sought: - to clarify the minimum requirements in respect of wide-screen services; - to underline the importance of broadcasting networks for advanced television services; - to specify that cable TV systems do not come under the scope of the Directive; - to stress that standards would be required in good time before the introduction to the market of digital television services; - to specify that advanced television services also included those using digital transmission systems; - to specify the scope of the standardization requirement by indicating the elements which comprise a transmission system; - to make reference to the "administered" rather than the "standardized" scrambling algorithm and to withdraw the reference to "inclusion in the television receivers" as far as conditional access was concerned; - to require that broadcasting systems should at least use the 16:9 aspect ratio for those services which were picked up in this format, without necessarily excluding their re-transmission in other formats; - to set a time limit of 9 months for the implementation of the provisions contained in the Directive. �

• 1994/10/25 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1994)0455 summary

    The Commission's amended proposal incorporated two amendments proposed by the European Parliament underlining the relevance of a reference to the "Television without Frontiers" directive and that it was up to the Union to prevent a detrimental dispersion of efforts in the field concerned. Moreover, the Commission accepted the content of the other four amendments through changes to Parliament's text. Thus, the Commission agreed that it was essential to establish common standards for the digital transmission of television signals whether by cable, by satellite or by terrestrial means and that this was best achieved by mandating a recognised European standardisation body, taking account of the outcome of the consensus processes under way among market parties. With regard to the problem of conditional access, the Commission considered that this issue was an important matter for the consumers and providers of pay television services and for the rights holders of programmes. As a result, it proposed that the directive should stipulate, on the basis of agreements concluded between the relevant actors, that all consumer equipment used to descramble digital television services should include the common scrambling algorithm in order to ensure that all providers of conditional access television services provided all consumers of these services in the European Union with their programmes. It also proposed that the directive should make provision for transcontrol of conditional access at cable television network head-ends and the granting of licences for techniques exclusive to conditional access. Finally, it was proposed that the development of the market for conditional access to digital television services be reviewed periodically. It was also important to note that the Commission rejected Parliament's amendments concerning the removal of the reference to the development of technology and the market as justification for the directive and the development of a system of wide-format analogical transmission services that was compatible with both PAL and SECAM. �

• 1994/04/19 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T3-0213/1994 summary

    The report by Mr CAUDRON on the use of standards for the transmission of television signals was adopted by the European Parliament. The main objective of this new text was to repeal the 1992 directive aimed at standardising the move to HDTV through the D2-MAC and HD-MAC transmission systems. This new directive marked a change in course for the audiovisual policy, since the requirement to use the abandoned D2-MAC standard to the benefit of a more flexible system no longer required compatibility with PAL or SECAM and, for HD that was not fully digital, the requirement to use the HD-MAC system. The European Parliament adopted all the amendments tabled by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. They aimed to introduce a little more "regulation" to the text. �

• 1994/04/18 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

• 1994/02/17 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A3-0086/1994
• 1993/12/01 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1993/11/15 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1993)0556 summary

    Council Directive 92/38/EEC aimed to facilitate Europe's transition from normal definition television (provided by the current PAL and SECAM systems) to high definition television (HDTV). The approach was based on compatibility developed for satellite and cable distribution, relying on the D2-MAC and HD-MAC transmission systems. In view of the development of the market and the current state of technological progress, it was appropriate to repeal Council Directive 92/38/EEC and to adopt a new directive to guarantee the establishment of a single market covering the production and transmission of and receiver equipment and transmission services for wide-screen 16:9 format television programmes throughout the Community by harmonising the transmission format. The new directive provided for all wide-screen television services to be in the 16:9 format irrespective of the transmission method used (cable, satellite or terrestrial network). Service providers would be able to choose the European standard for the television system which suited them best. For services in normal definition (625 lines), they would be able to choose between the current D2-MAC, any new analogue system that was fully compatible with PAL or SECAM, or any new fully digital system. High definition services offered the choice between HD-MAC and a fully digital system which had been standardised by a recognised European standardisation body. Producers of products intended for the general public had to meet a minimum requirement guaranteeing that the whole range of decoders likely to be marketed could be connected to the television receiver. The incorporation of a standard open interface socket in television receivers with screens beyond a certain size should provide this guarantee. Finally, the proposal required all cable network operators who decided to redistribute television services to retransmit in the wide-screen 16:9 format television services which they received in wide-screen format. The directive would be evaluated every two years. �

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1993)0556
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A3-0086/1994
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T3-0213/1994
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1994)0455
• Council position published: 11536/1/1994
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A4-0130/1995
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Debate in Council: 1854
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T4-0281/1995
• : Directive 1995/47
• : OJ L 281 23.11.1995, p. 0051

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)