INTERNET TOP LEVEL DOMAIN .EU
(22014)
14814/00
COM(00) 827
|
Draft Regulation on the implementation of the Internet Top Level Domain ".eu".
|
| Legal base: |
Article 156 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Department: |
Trade and Industry |
| Basis of consideration:
| Minister's letter of 30 March 2001
|
| Previous Committee Report:
| HC 28-vi (2000-01), paragraph 7 (14 February 2001)
|
| To be discussed in Council:
| 27 June 2001 Telecoms Council
|
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared, but request to be kept informed
|
Background
12.1 Following a positive response to its
consultation on the creation of an Internet Top Level Domain (TLD)
name, and agreement in principle from the Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Commission has brought
forward this draft Regulation. The .eu TLD it proposes
would be additional to, rather than a replacement for, existing
country code level TLDs, such as .uk.
12.2 When we considered the proposal on
14 February, we asked the Minister to write to us again in time
for us to consider an amended text on which she expected a Common
Position to be agreed at the 4 April Telecoms Council. It was
also clear that negotiations were continuing, in particular on
whether the Government's advocacy of a liberal Registry policy
would be supported by the other Member States. Under that policy
the new TLD would be available for use by enterprises and individuals
based in the EEA, EFTA and the applicant states.
The Minister's letter
12.3 In a letter received on 3 April, the
Minister reported progress and told us that the Presidency would
be seeking a "common orientation" at the April Council,
with a view to reaching a Common Position at the June Telecoms
Council.
The Legal Base
12.4 The Minister says that Article 156
was chosen because the proposal could be regarded as dealing with
achieving standards which assist the interoperability of networks.
One Member State is querying it but alternatives discussed with
the legal services of the Council and the Commission have been
considered inappropriate.
Eligibility of registrants
12.5 The Minister recalls that the UK has
been advocating an open registration policy as being consistent
with the global prominence of the single market and maximising
the Lisbon aim of accelerating e-commerce. It could also encourage
enlargement through online activity with the applicant states,
combating the risk of a "digital divide." However, the
Minister says there is a strong preference among Member States
for securing protection of the EU "brand" from abuse,
by requiring registrants to be legally linked with the EU in a
way that allows enforcement of Community laws, thus providing
some assurance that a registrant holding the .eu symbol
would behave according to EU norms. She adds:
"We have nevertheless
generated a degree of interest in making clear how entities in
the other EEA countries and the applicants could participate in
.eu. The Presidency has proposed that this be dealt with
by way of a Recital on the possibilities of extending the scope
of .eu to those countries, and when to do so. There has
been no discussion of the Recitals yet, but as things stand, I
expect that there could be eventual agreement on this basis."
"Determination of registration policies and
oversight by Member States"
12.6 Originally, the Commission proposed
that it should adopt public policy rules concerning the implementation
of .eu in accordance with the advisory procedure. Other aspects
of registration policy would have been decided by the Registry
in consultation with the Commission and other interested parties.
The Minister comments that:
"there is now a broad
consensus on the Commission determining the public policy principles
on registration via a comitology regulatory procedure and on beginning
registration operation only after defining a registration policy.
Some Member States are requesting that some of the principles
of the registration policy be included in the text of the Regulation,
because essential elements and implementation criteria should
be in the legal instrument, in accordance with the principles
of the comitology decision. The Presidency is proposing to allow
the Registry (after consultation with the Commission and the other
interested parties) to determine the initial registration policy,
and then to implement the public policy rules. In Council discussion,
the UK will continue to seek a balance between Council oversight
of key policies, and imposing unattractive or unworkable conditions
on the Commission and operators of .eu registries."
"Use of geographic terms at the second level"
12.7 One Member State wanted it made clear
that entities of a regional or local character might be eligible
to use .eu. Another Member State believed they should not
be eligible.
The April Telecoms Council
12.8 No significant progress was made at
the April Telecoms Council, according to officials, and the Regulation
is due to be considered again at the 27 June Council. The only
issue which is now causing a delay is that one Member State is
pressing for more clarity on the criteria for registration and
the definition of the Registry. The same Member State maintains
that Member States should have more power over sensitive policy
aspects, such as the use of regional and territorial names at
the second level, for instance by political organisations. The
Presidency and Commission are understood to be holding bilateral
discussions with the Member State concerned between now and June
to explore possible amendments to the text.
Conclusion
12.9 The Minister told us in January
that an amended proposal was expected to be adopted at the Telecoms
Council on 5-6 April. It is clear from her letter that the text
is likely to be amended further before it is put to the June Council
for a Common Position. Although we clear the document, we ask
the Government to keep us informed of any significant changes
to the text, if possible in time for us to consider the revised
text before it is put to the Council for a Common Position.
| 
