Economic regulation systems only work if regulators are independent, which implies in a minimal way that they are not corrupt. Few countries meet this basic requirement. Côte d'Ivoire has a telecommunications Agency, which is a State Corporation. By order of March 21, 2012, the Government creates the telecommunications regulatory authority. On May 4, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Agency of telecommunications convened to an extraordinary session and put an end to the mandate of its Director General, because of "serious shortcomings observed in the performance of his duties". He was immediately replaced by a telecommunication engineer, previously technical adviser to the Ministry. He was assigned the mission of preparing the transition of the system to an effectively independent, autonomous and impartial regulator.
The European Banking Union is based on supervision as much as on regulation: it concerns the operators as much as the structures of the sector, because the operators "hold" the sector.
This is why the "regulator - supervisor" holds the operators by the supervision and is close to them.
He meets them officially and in "soft law" relations. This is all the more necessary since the distinction between the Ex Ante and the Ex Post must be nuanced, in that its application is too rigid, in that it involves a long time (first of all the rules, then to apply them, then to notice a gap between rules and behaviors, then to repair it) is not appropriate if the system aims at the prevention of systemic crises, whose source is inside the operators.
This is why the body in charge of solving the difficulties of the systemic banks for the salvation of the systeme meets the banking sector itself, to ensure that they are permanently "resolvable", so that the hypothesis of their resolution never arises. This is the challenge of this system: that it is always ready, for never be applying.
____
In the European Banking Union, the Single Resolution Board (SRB) is in charge of "resolve" the difficulties of European systemic banks in difficulty. It is the public body of the second pillar of the Banking Union. The first pillar is the prevention of these difficulties and the third is the guarantee of deposits. The resolution is therefore more like an Ex Post mechanism.
But in this continuum through these three pillars between the Ex Ante and the Ex Post, the SRB does not wait passively - as would a traditional judge do - that the file of the troubled bank reaches it. Like a supervisor - which brings it closer to the first public in the system (Single Supervisory Board -SSB), which supervises all the banks, it is in direct contact with all the banks, and it approaches the hypothesis of a bank in trouble by a systemic perspective: it is therefore to the entire banking system that the SRB addresses itself.
As such, it organizes meetings, where he is located: in Brussels.
To resolve in Ex Post the difficulties of a bank, it has to present a quality (a little known concept in Bankruptcy Law): "resolvability". How build it? Who build it ? In its very design and in its application, bank by bank.
For the resolution body vis-à-vis all players in the banking and financial sector, it's clear: "Working together" is crucial in building resolvability ".
In the projection that is made, it is affirmed that there can be a successful resolution only if the operator in difficulty is not deprived of access to what makes to stay it alive, that is to say the banking and financial system itself, and more specifically the "Financial Market Infrastructures", for example payment services.
Does the Single Resolution Board expect spontaneous commitments from the FMIs for such a "right of access"? In this case, as the Single Resolution Board says, this right of access corresponds to "critical functions" for a bank, the resolution situation can not justify the closure of the service.
By nature, these crucial operators are entities that report to regulators who oversee them. Who enforces - and immediately - this right of access? When one can think that it is everyone, it risks being nobody .... That is why the resolution body, relaying in this a concern of the Financial Stability Board, underlines that it is necessary to articulate the supervisors, regulators and "resolvers" between them.
_____
To read this program, since it is a proposed program of work for the banking sector, four observations can be made:
1. We are moving more and more towards a general "intermaillage" (which will perhaps replace the absence of a global State, but it is an similar nature because it is always to public authorities that it refers and not to self-regulation);
2. But as there is no political authority to keep these guardians, the entities that articulate all these various public structures, with different functions, located in different countries, acting according to different temporalities, these are the companies themselves that internalize the concern that animates those who built the system: here the prevention of systemic risk. This is the definition of Compliance, which brings back to companies, here more clearly those those which manage the Market Infrastructures, the obligations of Compliance (here the management of systemic risk through the obligation of giving access).
3. Even without a single systemic guard, there is always a recourse. That will be the judge. There are already many, there will probably be more in a system of this type, more and more complex, the articulation of disputes is sometimes called "dialogue". And it is undoubtedly "decisions of principle" that will set the principles common to all of these particular organisms.
4. We then see the emergence of Ex Ante mechanisms for the solidity of the systems, and the solidity of the players in the systems, and then the Ex Post resolution of the difficulties of the actors according to access to the solidity of the infrastructures of these systems, which ultimately depend on judges (throughout the West) facing areas where all of this depends much less on the judge: the rest of the world.
The "Société de Législation comparée" (Society of Comparative Legislation) publishes the acts of a symposium.
The notion of "service of general economic interest" was developed by the European Commission and the European Court of Justice, before the Treaty, including the Lisbon Treaty and its Protocol 26, give it its place.
Thus, member States, as demonstrated by the collective work, must take into consideration, this European doctrine, that balances competition and public service, and no longer develop national concept of utilities ignorant of legal developments in Law of the European Union.
On May 28, 2010, the Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP — French postal and telecommunications regulatory authority) published a report it ordered from WIK Consult, which details the tangible and intangible benefits accruing to La Poste (The French postal service) as a result of its universal service obligation, which are to be included in calculating compensation provided to the universal service provider for its universal service obligations, in application of the European Union’s Third Postal Directive liberalizing the postal market in the European Union. This report is critical in tone, but La Poste takes issue with its methodology and conclusions.
FRENCH
Rapport bibliographique (littérature grise) : Le 28 mai 2010, l’ARCEP a publié un rapport commandé auprès de WIK Consult, qui détaille une méthodologie pour l’évaluation des avantages immatériels dont bénéficie La Poste dans le cadre de ses obligations de service universel.
Le 28 Mai 2010, l’ARCEP a publié un rapport commandé auprès de WIK Consult, qui détaille les avantages matériels et immatériels dont bénéficie La Poste en tant que prestataire de service universel, et qui doivent être compris dans le calcul de la compensation accordée au prestataire de service universel en contrepartie de ses obligations de service universel, en application de la Troisième Directive Postale de l’Union Européenne.
GERMAN
Buchrezension: Die Autorité de Régulation des Communications Electroniques et des Postes (ARCEP - die französische Post- und Telekommunikationsaufsichtsbehörde) hat am 28. Mai 2010 einen Bericht veröffentlicht, den WIK Consult bestellt wurde. In diesem Bericht wird eine Methode für die Auswertung den unwesentlichen Vorzügen, die La Poste (die französische Post) aus ihrer Verpflichtung des öffentlichen Dienstes zieht, vorgestellt.
Die Autorité de Régulation des Communications Electroniques et des Postes (ARCEP - die französische Post- und Telekommunikationsaufsichtsbehörde) hat am 28. Mai 2010 einen Bericht, der von WIK Consult erstattet wurde, in dem detailliert wurden, welche sind die Vorzüge der Poste (die französische Post) im Lauf ihrer von den Dritten Richtlinien für Postdienste verlangerten Verpflichtung des öffentlichen Dienstes. Sehr kritisch, die Ergebnisse dieses Berichtes bleiben für La Poste umstritten.
GREEK
Βιβλιογραφική Έκθεση (Γκρίζα Βιβλιογραφία): Στις 28 Μαΐου 2010, η Αρχή Ηλεκτρονικών Επικοινωνιών& Ταχυδρομείων Γαλλίας (ARCEP) δημοσιεύει μια έκθεση που ανέθεσε να ετοιμάσει το WIK Consult, στην οποία παρουσιάζονται λεπτομερώς μέθοδοι για την αξιολόγηση των άϋλων οφελών που προκύπτουν ωφελούν για το Γαλλικό Ταχυδρομείο από τις υποχρεώσεις καθολικής υπηρεσίας.
Στις 28 Μαΐου 2010, η Αρχή Ηλεκτρονικών Επικοινωνιών& Ταχυδρομείων Γαλλίας (ARCEP) δημοσίευσε μια έκθεση που ανέθεσε στο WIK Consult, στην οποία παρουσιάζονται λεπτομερώς τα υλικά και μη υλικά οφέλη που εισρέουν στο Γαλλικό Ταχυδρομείο ως αποτέλεσμα των υποχρεώσεων καθολικής υπηρεσίας, τα οποία πρέπει να συμπεριληφθούν στον υπολογισμό αποζημίωσης που παρέχεται στον φορέα παροχής καθολικής υπηρεσίας κατ’ εφαρμογή της Τρίτης Κοινοτικής Οδηγίας για τα Ταχυδρομεία, με την οποία απελευθερώνεται στην Ευρώπη η σχετική αγορά. Η Έκθεση αυτή έχει επικριτικό ύφος, αλλά το Ταχυδρομείο διαφωνεί με τη μεθοδολογία και τα συμπεράσματά της.
POLISH
Raport bibliograficzny (szara literatura) : W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował zlecony raport wykonany przez firmę WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w ramach swoich zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych.
W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował raport WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania materialnych i niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w wyniku realizowania zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych. Przedstawiona w raporcie metoda mówi o konieczności ujęcia korzyści w wyliczaniu kompensacji przyznanej dłużnikowi świadczenia usług uniwersalnych w zamian za jego zobowiązania świadczenia usług uniwersalnych, co jest zgodne z Trzecia Dyrektywą Pocztową Unii Europejskiej.
POLISH
Raport bibliograficzny (szara literatura) : W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował zlecony raport wykonany przez firmę WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w ramach swoich zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych.
W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował raport WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania materialnych i niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w wyniku realizowania zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych. Przedstawiona w raporcie metoda mówi o konieczności ujęcia korzyści w wyliczaniu kompensacji przyznanej dłużnikowi świadczenia usług uniwersalnych w zamian za jego zobowiązania świadczenia usług uniwersalnych, co jest zgodne z Trzecia Dyrektywą Pocztową Unii Europejskiej.
POLISH
Raport bibliograficzny (szara literatura) : W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował zlecony raport wykonany przez firmę WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w ramach swoich zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych.
W dniu 28 maja 2010 r. Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - francuski organ regulacji Telekomunikacji i Poczty) opublikował raport WIK Consult, który szczegółowo prezentuje metodę oszacowywania materialnych i niematerialnych korzyści wykorzystywanych przez La Poste (francuski serwis pocztowy) w wyniku realizowania zobowiązań świadczenia usług uniwersalnych. Przedstawiona w raporcie metoda mówi o konieczności ujęcia korzyści w wyliczaniu kompensacji przyznanej dłużnikowi świadczenia usług uniwersalnych w zamian za jego zobowiązania świadczenia usług uniwersalnych, co jest zgodne z Trzecia Dyrektywą Pocztową Unii Europejskiej.
SPANISH
El 28 de mayo del 2010, la ARCEP (el regulador francés de telecomunicaciones y servicios postales) publicó un informe que comisionó de WIK Consult, detallando los métodos de la evaluación intangible de los beneficios que acumula La Poste (el servicio postal francés) de sus obligaciones universales de servicios.
El 28 de mayo del 2010, la Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP — el regulador francés de telecomunicaciones y servicios postales) publicó un informe que había encomendado a WIK Consult, en donde se detalla los beneficios tangibles e intangibles pertenecientes a La Poste (el servicio postal francés) como resultado de sus obligaciones universales de servicios, los cuales serán incluidos ahora in la calculación de la compensación otorgada al proveedor universal de servicio por sus obligaciones universales de servicios en aplicación de la tercera Directiva Postal de la Unión Europea que liberaliza el mercado postal en le Union Europea. Este informe es de carácter crítico pero La Poste reconoce su legitimidad en cuanto a su metodología y sus conclusiones.
The Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF – French Financial Markets Authority) approves the "Provisions" section of the Code of Good Practice published by the Association française de la gestion financière (AFG—French Asset Management Association).
The nature of virtual currency remains uncertain. In any case, the object is very attractive, in particular because its nature, presented as "new", implies that its handling is not regulated.
This allows, in particular for individuals or start up, to issue "tokens" to offer them in exchange of funds, by the "initial coin offerings (ICOs)" technic, tokens acquired by investors, without being banking institutions, or borrowing money , nor issuing capital securities.
Operators demand that this behavior be recognized in its novelty and be recognized as being governed only by the contract and the general principles of loyalty, commitment and information, because what it is not prohibited is permitted while what is not regulated is freely organized by the parties who consent to it.
Airports are critical infrastructure. They often receive support from the State and the European Commission has adopted specific guidelines to soften the principle of prohibition of State aid in this area. Yet it is not necessary that the regulation be the mask of a violation of competitive equality. This is why the Commission has extended and prolonged on June 27, 2012, the investigation initiated in 2007 proposed to the airport of Alghero, Italy. Indeed, the investigation revealed including infrastructure subsidies, which the Commission doubt that they are comply with EU law.
After two years of implementation of France, the 2004 Directive on markets in financial instruments is to be reviewed at the European level in 2010. The French report, elaborated by Pierre Fleuriot, examines whether or not the directive’s main objectives –the deregulation of markets and the lowering of trading costs- were achieved in an efficient way.
The French telecommunications and postal regulator (ARCEP – Autorité de regulation des communications électroniques et des postes) has prepared a project of pricing of mobile call termination, that is to say the amount that an operator must pay to reach another user. Thus, when a subscriber of Orange mobile calls a subscriber of Free mobile, Orange gives money to Free. Inversely, when a subscriber of Free mobile calls a user of Orange mobile, Free gives money to Orange. The regulator notes that Free mobile, new entrant, have less subscribers than the three operators, and will therefore receive less money than the others. It's the reason why, it justify to his advantage a temporarily higher pricing, the time it finds its place in the competitive market of mobile phone. On April 12, 2012, the European Commission publicly expressed that the principle of an asymmetric pricing policy is insufficient. The French telecommunications and postal regulator (ARCEP – Autorité de regulation des communications électroniques et des postes) has responded by standing that the principle of asymmetrical pricing was not sufficient and that justifications will be provided.
The American Supreme Court accepted on November 29th, 2010, to hear Microsoft’s claims in an appeal of a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit in Washington of December 12th, 2009, arguing that the burden of proof is too high for companies accused of infringement and whose defense is that the patent is not valid.
FRENCH Fiche thématique (Innovation) : L’organisation de la charge de la preuve dans les cas de propriété intellectuelle actuellement en instance devant la Cour Suprême américaine.
La Cour Suprême américaine a accepté le 29 novembre 2010 de recevoir la plainte de Microsoft en appel d’une décision de la Cour américaine d’appel du circuit fédéral de Washington du 12 Décembre 2009. Selon Microsoft, le standard de preuve pour une entreprise accuse de contrefaçon soutenant que le brevet violé n’est pas valide est trop élevée.
GERMAN Thematischer Bericht (Innovation): Die Zuteilung des Beweislasts in Patentverletzungsfälle steht vor dem amerikanischen Obergericht.
Das Amerikanische Obergericht hat am 29. November 2010 Microsofts Klage in einer Anfechtung einer Entscheidung des amerikanischen Bundesberufungsgerichtes in Washington vom 12. Dezember 2009 angenommen. Microsoft behauptet, dass der Beweislast für Unternehmen, die wegen Patentverletzung angeklagt wurden, und die die Ungültigkeit des Patents beweisen wollen, zu schwer ist.
SPANISH Informe Temático (Innovación): La organización de la carga de la prueba de casos de propiedad intelectual actualmente pendientes ante la Corte Suprema de los EEUU La Corte Suprema de los EEU aceptó el 22 de noviembre del 2010 escuchar reclamos de Microsoft en una apelación de la decisión de la Corte americana de Apelaciones del Circuito Federal en la capital de Washington el 12 de diciembre del 2009, argumentando que la carga de prueba era demasiada alta para compañías acusadas de violación y cuyas defensa es que el patente es inválido.
ITALIAN
Relazione tematica (Innovazione): L’onere della prova in material di proprietà intellettuale dinanzi alla Corte suprema degli Stati Uniti
Il 9 novembre 2010, la Corte suprema degli Stati Uniti d’America ha accettato di pronunciarsi su una decisione della Corte d’appello federale di Washington resa il 12 novembre 2009 contro Microsoft. Quest’ultima sostiene che l’onere della prova che spetta alle compagnie accusate di violazione dei diritti in materia di proprietà intellettuale é eccessivo nel caso in cui il convenuto tenti di dimostrare che il brevetto non sia valido.
PORTUGUESE Informe Temático (Inovação): A distribuição do ônus da prova nos casos de propriedade intelectual atualmente pendentes perante a Corte Suprema nos Estados Unidos da América
A Corte Suprema dos Estados Unidos da América decidiu, no dia 22 de novembro de 2010, conhecer das alegações de Microsoft no recurso contra a decisão do Tribunal americano de Apelação do Distrito federal de Washington de 12 de dezembro de 2009. Em seu recurso, Microsoft alega que seria muito elevado o ônus da prova para companhias que, acusadas de contrabando, argumentam que a patente violada não seria válida.