Search results : 240
Refine your search| IRIS 2008-6:1/3 [BE] Recommendation on Call-TV | |
|---|---|
|
On 18 October 2007, the Court of Justice of the European Communities delivered a landmark decision in the case between KommAustria and ORF on call-TV determining under what circumstances it came closer to commercial advertising and under what circumstances it was rather a matter of tele-shopping (see IRIS 2008-1: 4). On 21 February 2008, in application of this jurisprudence, the Collège d’Autorisation et de Contrôle (authorisation and supervision panel) of the Conseil Supérieur de l’Audiovisuel (audiovisual regulatory body – CSA) of the French-speaking Community found against the editor of the... |
|
| IRIS 2008-4:1/8 European Commission: Investigation into the Funding of National Public Service Broadcasters | |
|
The Commission has closed its investigation into the financing of the Vlaamse Radio- en Televisieomroep (Flemish Radio and Television Broadcasting – VRT). After complaints from several private competitors were received in 2004, a preliminary investigation on behalf of the Commission had found the VRT financing regime to be in breach of EC Treaty state aid rules. These rules declare subsidies liable to distort competition to be incompatible with the common market (Article 87). The VRT’s funding measures pre-existed the entry into force of the EC Treaty and, therefore, amounted to “existing aid”... |
|
| IRIS 2008-4:1/2 European Court of Human Rights: Cases of Voskuil v. the Netherlands and Tillack v. Belgium | |
|
In two recent judgments, the European Court of Human Rights has given substantial protection to journalists’ right of non-disclosure of their sources under Article 10 of the Convention. The case of Voskuil v. the Netherlands concerns Mr Voskuil’s allegations that he was denied the right not to disclose his source for two articles he had written for the newspaper Sp!ts and that he was detained for more than two weeks in an attempt to compel him to do so. Voskuil had been summoned to appear as a witness for the defence in the appeal proceedings concerning three individuals accused of... |
|
| IRIS 2008-2:1/3 Court of Justice of the European Communities: Judgment on Must-Carry Obligations and the Freedom to Provide Services | |
|
In 2001, a group of cable operators (UPC, Coditel Brabant SPRL, Brutele and Wolu TV ASBL) brought proceedings before the Belgian Conseil d’Etat (Council of State) challenging the obligation imposed on them by Belgian legislation to broadcast, in the bilingual region of Brussels-Capital, television programmes transmitted by certain private broadcasters designated by the State authorities. The cable operators contested their must-carry obligations on the basis of Articles 49 EC and 86 EC (the latter being read in conjunction with Article 82 EC). They argued that the private broadcasters benefiting... |
|
| IRIS 2008-1:1/33 [NL/BE] Film support agreement between the Dutch Film Fund Nederlands Fonds voor de Film and the Flemish Audiovisual Fund Vlaams Audiovisueel Fonds (VAF) | |
|
On 1 January 2008, a film support agreement entered into force between the Amsterdam based Dutch Film Fund (Nederlands Fonds voor de Film), which is under the patronage of the Dutch Ministry of Culture, and the Brussels based Flemish Audiovisual Fund (Vlaams Audiovisueel Fonds - VAF) set up by the Government of the Flemish Community. The agreement applies until 31 December 2008, after which the term is automatically extended for one year unless and until either of the contracting parties terminates the co-operation by informing the other party by the end of November at the latest. Article 5.9... |