Kein Folientitel

1
Jean Monnet Professor for European
Integration Technical University
Berlin Department of Computer Science
Prof. Dr. iur. Bernd Lutterbeck
Lithuania's future role in the European
information society the challenge of the
Acquis Communautaire
Vilnius, October 23 th, 2000
Slides from Presentations of Commissioner
Liikanen should be read together with my
talk at http//ig.cs.tu-berlin.de/bl055/index.htm
l
2
Commissions top eEurope priorities for Lisbon
1. All schools to be connected to the Internet by
2001 2. To open local access markets for
Competition by the end of 2000 (Unbundling of the
local loop) 3. Agreement during 2000 on pending
e-commerce legislation
3
B 2 B - or not to Be
4
Objectives

• bring every citizen, school, business and
  administration on-line - quickly
• create a digitally literate and entrepreneurial
  Europe
• ensure an inclusive information society

7
5
Mobiles EU ahead of the US
Mobile subscribers per 100 inhabitants (December
1999)
EU average
Source FT Mobile Communications USA Cellular
Telecoms Industry Association
5
6
Internet penetration in Europe and elsewhere
Internet penetration per 100 inhabitants (Year-end
1999)
Japan
Sweden
UK
Spain
USA
Finland
France
Germany
Italy
Canada
The Netherlands
4
Source Computer Industry Almanach Inc.
7
PCs Europe behind the US
PC penetration in homes (October 1999)
EU average
Source European Commission / EOS Gallup Europe
USA DG INFSO calculation from US DoC
3
8
Internet penetration in EU homes ()(October
1999)
EU average
Source European Commission / EOS Gallup Europe
9
Internet penetration vs. Access Cost
Source Booz Allen Hamilton
10
Mobile phone penetration
Million subscribers
EU
EU mobile liberalisation
USA
Source FT Mobile Communications
USA Cellular Telecoms Industry Association
11
Mobile subscribers per 100 inhabitants(December
1999)
EU average
Source FT Mobile Communications
USA Cellular Telecoms Industry Association
12
Simplification, clarification
Services Directive (90/388/EEC) extended to
Satellite (94/46/EC) Cable (95/51/EC) Mobile
(96/2/EC) Full competition (96/19/EC) Cable
ownership (1999/64/EC) ONP Framework Directive
(90/387/EEC amended by 97/51/EC) Licensing
Directive (97/13/EC) GSM Directive
(87/372/EEC) ERMES Directive (90/544/EC) DECT
Directive (91/287/EEC) S-PCS Decision
(97/710/EC) UMTS Decision (99/128/EC) European
Emergency Number Decision (91/396/EC) Internationa
l Access Code Decision (92/264/EEC) ONP leased
lines Directive (92/44/EEC amended by
97/51/EC) TV standards Directive
(95/47/EC) Interconnection Directive(97/33/ EC
amended by 98/61/EC) Voice telephony Directive
(98/10/EC) Telecoms data protection Directive
(97/66/EC)
Liberalisation Directive
Framework Directive Authorisation
Directive Access Interconnection Directive
Unbundled local loop Regulation Users Rights
Directive Data protection Directive
Erkki Liikanen - 12/07/2000
13
The new package
Liberalisation Directive (Art. 86)
Framework Directive (Art. 95)
Spectrum Decision (Art. 95)
Erkki Liikanen - 12/07/2000
14
Policy objectives
Flexibility Legal certainty Technologicalneutra
lity Harmonisation
Framework Authorisations Access
Interconnection Unbundled local
loop Universal service Data protection
Simple marketentry Clear obligationsfor
dominant players More competition Cheaper
fasterInternet access Consumer rights Privacy
protection
Erkki Liikanen - 12/07/2000
15
Rely increasingly on competition rules
Amount of regulation
Pro-competitive sectorial telecoms Laws
Competition Law
1998
1990
2001
Erkki Liikanen - 12/07/2000
16
Unbundled local loopA harmonised legal basis

• New entrants are duplicating backbone networks
  but not local access networks

Incumbentslocal loop

• Local loop unbundling will lead to lower
  tariffs and widespread high-speed Internet

Erkki Liikanen - 12/07/2000
17
Recommendations for the European Dimension
EU-1 When the institutions of the Eastern
European countries adopt electronic signatures,
they should be well informed on the European
Community frameworks for IT, without loss of
cultural and national identity.Therefore, they
have to define national conditions and then
develop national politics, which has the
opportunity for regulating the development of
electronic signatures taken into consideration
special national sensitivities.
17
18
Recommendations for the European Dimension
EU-2 Enhance conditions for the emergence of a
balance between government regulation and
self-regulation in the area of electronic
signatures. Both kinds of regulation should take
into account a global perspective.
18
19
Recommendations for the European Dimension
EU-3 It should be guaranteed through binding
rules of competitiveness, that market position
can not be abused for enforcement of certain
models of electronic signatures. That also means
that the price formation can not be monopolized.
19