Yesterday, on the 11th of November we went to the European Parliament to discuss the proposed Single Market Regulation (COM(2013) 627 final ) and meet with 2 Members of the European Parliament, namely:


Present from our side:

·  Wouter van Hulten, wouter@vanhulten.com 

·  Alain Van Gaever, co-chair-elect RIPE Cooperation WG, avangaev@gmail.com 

·  Bastiaan Goslings, bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net 

·  Gordon Lennox gordon.lennox.13@gmail.com 

·  Joy Marino, chair Milan Internet Exchange j.marino@mix-it.net 

·  Nina Bargisen, nihb@netflix.com 

·  Innocenzo Gemma,  inno@innogenna.it (observer)


On the agenda: the following items related to the Single Market Regulation were discussed

  • Assured Service Quality (ASQ) – proposal
  • Net Neutrality
  • Depeering practices
  • Engagement with the community of IP experts

(Link to the draft Regulation: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/regulation-european-parliament-and-council-laying-down-measures-concerning-european-single ) Most relevant Articles: Art.19, Art.23, Art.24


Short debriefing of the meeting:

  1. ASQ: we expressed our concerns that the introduction of the Assured Service Quality is a “solution in search of a problem”. That it is not needed. And that this ASQ-proposal would be harmful to the evolution and innovative power of the Internet. MEP Del Castillo informed us that the ASQ-related articles would be removed in the draft she would send for translation next Thursday.
  2. Net Neutrality: we expressed our concerns that given the importance of this topic it should not be rushed through.  While a consensus could not be achieved (given the difficulty of the topic and the short time frame available this is hardly surprising) MEP Del Castillo seemed to suggest that she would strengthen the “non discriminatory “ principle in the Regulations.
  3. De-peering: The importance of peering and the European model of IXPs was highlighted.  Concerns were expressed regarding the situation in Italy where Telecom Italia is de-peering.  It was noted that “de-peering” is an issue which is more relevant in other legislative/regulatory instruments and is not part of the proposed Single Market Regulation (relevant instruments are: Review of Relevant markets, DG Comp investigations).  We explained that the European model of peering is currently being copied in the US, under the Open-IX initiative. MEP Del Castillo mentioned she would highlight this issue with her colleague MEP Trautmann.  Further information would be welcomed.
  4. We stressed the importance of engaging with the EU institutions, including of course the European Parliament,  and our collective willingness  to do so.  It is important that the Internet community is heard when proposed regulation, which affects the functioning of the Internet, is being developed and discussed.

Next Steps: 
  1. MEP Del Castillo’s text will go to translation this Thursday 14 November. Suggestions are still welcome.  If you will submit feedback, please ensure you provide them in the form of proposed modifications to the current text, and with a justification why this change is needed. For those who want to engage individually, the MEP contact details can be found here: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/96945/MARIETJE_SCHAAKE_home.html and http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/28390/PILAR_DEL+CASTILLO+VERA_home.html
Moving forward / Recommendations
  1. This time we were faced with particularly short time-frames between proposed legislation “leaving” the Commission and then being debated in Council and Parliament.  It is however also more difficult in general correcting many things once they have been drafted and agreed by the Commission. We should therefore  try and engage sooner in the legislative process. This means ideally before any legislation is actually proposed (i.e. talking directly to the European Commission). It is believed that Commission officials would welcome views from the Internet community. We should therefore start to establish a list of interlocutors and contacts so we could provide appropriate expertise. We should also seek to establish a view on what the Commission is going to do - in terms of their own forward planning.
  2. Feedback and comment on any and all of this is most welcome on the list  mailto:cooperation-wg@ripe.net


Alain Van Gaever