JusNytt

Norway - a case for asymmetric regulation of termination charges?

E-post Skriv ut PDF

JusNytt advokat Halvor Manshaus In Norway, a recent dispute between the incumbent Telenor and an alternative network operator (ANO) draws attention to the issue of asymmetric regulation of termination charges. This case demonstrates the opportunities of a dominant operator to discipline behaviour of smaller players, by applying a range of measures. In our opinion, it serves to illustrate the appropriateness of light hand regulation of ANOs in the termination markets.

The Commisions position on asymmetric regulation

According to the Commision?s Recommendation on Relevant Markets under the new regulatory framework, call termination in each fixed (and mobile) network shall be considered to be a separate market, in which the network operator will have a monopoly and presumably also significant market power (SMP). However, the Commision has stated that there is a wide margin of discretion for NRAs to apply asymmetric regulation.

In a recent notification by the German regulator, RegTP, it claimed that alternative network operators were not in a position to raise prices above the competitive level, as the incumbent DT could exert sufficient pressure when negotiating call termination charges. On this basis, RegTP proposed not to regulate other termination charges than that of the incumbent. The Commision vetoed this proposal, stating that RegTP had not provided sufficient evidence for the lack of market power of ANOs.

Norway - ANO termination charges

In Norway, like most other European countries, the SMP decisions under the new regulatory framework are under preparation, and the old regulatory regime is still in force. Currently, only the incumbent Telenor, is deemed to have SMP on call termination in fixed networks and is subject to cost oriented termination charges, currently at appr. 0,5 Eurocent/min.

Traditionally, the termination charges in fixed networks have been identical for all fixed network operators, due to a requirement of reciprocity in the interconnection agreements of the incumbent. When this requirement was removed some time ago, several ANOs increased their termination charges, with 30 % at the most. These price increases did not cause any reactions from Telenor or the authorities.

In november 2004 a small ANO, here called "TelCo", decided to set its termination charge to the same level as the incumbent?s mobile operator, at approximately 9 Eurocent/min. TelCo argued that since mobile operators are allowed to charge termination rates high above cost and subsidise outgoing calls, fixed operators should have the same opportunity.

Incumbent measures

Within soon, Telenor brought the matter before the Norwegian Post and Telecommunication Authorities (NPTA). The NPTA found that the termination charge of TelCo was not in breach of regulations, since TelCo does not have SMP under the current regime. Telenor also brought a complaint before the Norwegian Competition Authorities, claiming that the TelCo had abused its dominant position in the termination market. The NCA has not yet reached a final decision.

Subsequently, Telenor took several measures against TelCo. First, Telenor stated that it would bar all incoming international calls to TelCo?s network. This measure was denied by the NPTA as being a unporportionate limitation of use. Telenor then notified TelCo that it would no longer carry out invoicing of termination of calls from TelCo to Telenor?s international interconnection partners on behalf of TelCo. In practise, this would force TelCo to enter into separate international interconnection agreements.

The other measure of Telenor was to apply an automatic voice message on all calls to TelCo?s network from the customers of Telenor. The voice message would appear before the call was answered, informing the customer of the charge for the call. TelCo brought the measure before the NPTA, arguing that a voice message would distort the quality of service and have devastating effects for TelCo in the end user market. The NPTA, however, found that a voice message did not constitute a limitation of use that required the prior consent of the authorities.

When the voice message was applied, it caused malfunction of telefax communication to TelCo?s customers, raising a storm of complaints. On this background, the NPTA ordered Telenor to lift the measure temporarily until the problems were solved. Despite the voice message being in force for only a couple of days, the TelCo lost many of its customers.

In March 2005, TelCo sold its assets to another ANO and abandoned its telephony business.

Conclusions

One could argue that the substantial price increase of TelCo?s termination charge shows that TelCo was able to set the price independently of the market in the first place, and that ex-ante price regulation should apply also to ANOs termination charges.

On the other hand, the measures taken by Telenor against TelCo resulted in the TelCo exiting the market within a short period of time.

Considering the effects that Telenor?s measures had on TelCo, it is likely that the mere threat of applying measures, such as a voice message or denial of invoicing of international calls, will considerably restrict the pricing of any other ANOs. Thus, Telenor will probably be able to strongly limit the power of ANOs to act independently in the termination market.

The Norwegian case could supply some of the evidence that the Commision has inquired from the German regulator. In any case, it provides strong arguments for light hand regulation of ANOs termination charges.

- The author, Tomas Myrbostad, is an expert within Telecommunications- and IT-Law, with prior experience from the Norwegian regulatory authority. Tomas has now returned to his practice as a lawyer, and can be found in the Telecom department of the Lawfirm Schjødt in Oslo, Norway.

 

JusNytt gir leserne nyheter, artikler, kommentarer og tilgang til en omfattende samling med kildemateriale. JusNytt har definert enkelte hovedområder:

Immaterialrett
opphavsrett, patentrett og varemerkerett 
Dette er rettsområder der verdier og rettigeter er knyttet opp til ikke-materielle gjenstander eller goder. Eksempler på slike verdier er goodwill, åndsverk, varemerker, oppfinnelser, design o.l. Lovreguleringen her er spredt utover, og er etter hvert blitt temmelig komplisert. Eksempelvis har opphavsrett blitt et temmelig komplisert fagfelt, og preges av det som skjer på den internasjonale arena.

Telekom
markedsregulering og konkurranserett 
Telekom og konkurranserett har gått hånd i hånd lenge her til lands, og er blitt sterkt aktualisert i kjølvannet av liberaliseringen på telesektoren. Et marked preget av sterk demografisk penetrasjon på moderne teknologi og infrastruktur inviterer til sterk konkurranse i et tøft marked. Rettslige problemstillinger vil ofte få store økonomiske konsekvenser.  

Innhold
ytringsfrihet og formidlingsansvar

Dommer fra domstolen i Strasbourg som administrer den europeiske konvensjonen for mennesekerettigheter har direkte påvirkning på våre norske regler om ærekrenkelser og ytringsfrihet. Norsk rett er blitt justert ved flere fellende dommer i Strasbourg, slik at ytringsfriheten er blitt sterkere enn tidligere. Samtidig ser vi en eksplosiv vekt i ytringer gjennom nye medier, både via nye tv-medier og Interntett. Forskjellen mellom brukerskapt og egenprodusert innhold blir mer utydelig og har vært gjenstand for mye debatt de seneste årene. Pressen er utfordret av enkeltpersoner som leverer innhold, samtidig som pressen er i en prosess der ansvarsrollen og medvirkningsproblematikken vurderes fortløpende.

Ansvarlig: Halvor Manshaus - advokat hos Advokatfirmaet Schjødt DA i Oslo.

Nytt fra Lovdata

RSS feed fra Lovdata: Siste avgjørelser
  • LG-2014-184879
    43 år gammel mann, tidligere straffet 24 ganger, var i tingretten dømt for grov narkotikakriminalitet samt vinningsforbrytelser i form av grove tyverier med innbrudd i...
  • LG-2014-182306
    Tingretten avsa kjennelse om bevissikring etter tvisteloven kapittel 28 og påla rekvirenten å dekke kostnadene ved denne etter hovedregel i § 28-5. Etter anke ble...

Populære fagartikler

jusnytt_emd_hus Ytringsfrihet: EMD befester kildevernet Artikkelen er skrevet av advokat Jon Wessel-Aas og er tidligere publisert på hans blogg: www.uhuru.biz. Wessel-Aas er advokat i NRK og har prosedert ...
 
jusnytt_cd_lock_drm Opphavsrett: Jailbreaking og omgåelse av DRM Det amerikanske Library of Congress har nå publisert den siste oversikten over unntak fra reglene om vern av digitale rettighetssystemer. I USA ver...
 
JusNytt_Betamax Betamax-saken: opphavsrettsthriller Betamax-saken vakte stor oppmerksomhet på 80-tallet, og har hatt stor innflytelse på tolkningen og forståelsen av opphavsretten i gråsonen mellom ...
 

Aktuelle artikler


Ansvarlig for denne tjenesten er advokat Halvor Manshaus i Advokatfirmaet Schjødt DA. Dersom du ønsker å bidra med innhold velg kontakt på menyen ovenfor. Poenget med JusNytt har vært å gjøre tilgjengelig informasjon innenfor områder som kan være vanskelig tilgjengelig for mange.

Bruk av tekst, bilder eller annet materiale fra JusNytt utover lovens unntak krever samtykke.

Kjerneområdene er: Immaterialrett (opphavsrett og åndsverk, varemerke, patent, design o.l.), Telekom (markedsregulering og konkurranserett), Innhold og Ansvar (ytringsfrihet, presserett og ansvar for innhold / publisering) samt at det er samlet en del materiale i tilknytning til et arbeide om romerretten fra 500-tallet (Justinians lovsamlig Corpus Iuris Civilis).