VZCZCXRO6671
PP RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV
DE RUEHFR #7511/01 3261516
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 221516Z NOV 06
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3310
INFO RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAFCC/FCC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEAWJA/DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WASHDC PRIORITY
RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES  PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 007511 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE EB/CIP AND EUR/WE 
PLEASE PASS TO USTR JMCHALE AND KSCHAGRIN 
FCC FOR TWEISLER 
COMMERCE FOR NTIA 
JUSTICE FOR KWILLNER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ECPS ECON FR
SUBJECT: TELECOM ATTORNEY ON FRANCE'S ICT STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES 
 
 
NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  On November 16, Hogan and Hartson Attorney (and 
long-time observer of the French telecoms sector) Winston Maxwell 
told us that poor consumer protection and nonpublic frequency 
management were the two areas detracting from France's otherwise 
robust implementation of EU directives.  The EU, with the exception 
of Germany, was leaning toward regulating new digital fiber networks 
and traditional copper networks in the same way to ensure a level 
playing field and prevent market dominance.  France would not permit 
internet providers to "wall-off" part of the internet, although they 
would be able to charge for premium services.  A merger between 
telecom regulator Autorite de Regulation des Communications 
Electroniques et des Postes (ARCEP) and audiovisual regulator 
Conseil Superieur de l'Audiovisuel (CSA) would rationalize spectrum 
management, but the disruption involved could offset any efficiency 
gains.  End summary. 
 
¶2.  (U) On November 16, econoff met with Hogan and Hartson Attorney 
Winston Maxwell to discuss French implementation of EU telephony and 
information society directives, data protection, regulation of next 
generation telephone networks, "Internet neutrality," and the 
possibility of a merger between telecom regulator Autorite de 
Regulation des Communications Electroniques et des Postes (ARCEP) 
and audiovisual regulator Conseil Superieur de l'Audiovisuel (CSA). 
Maxwell has practiced in Paris for twenty years, and has a vast 
array of contacts throughout the French administration. 
 
French Implementation of EU Directives 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶3. (SBU)  According to Maxwell, the wide consumer choice regarding 
long distance and Internet providers is a testimony to robust French 
implementation of EU telephony and information society directives. 
The two areas for improvement are consumer protection and frequency 
management.  On consumer protection, most European communications 
regulators have a section that receives and tracks consumer 
complaints on various providers.  The publication of these 
statistics themselves embarrasses market providers to minimize 
inconveniences to customers.  The lack of such a division in ARCEP 
has led to quite bad customer service, which has inspired a spate of 
law suits in French courts.  On spectrum management, he said that 
France needed to debate what to do with the spectrum that would 
become available after the 2011 switch from analog to digital 
television.  A bill that the Senate is considering proposes to 
provide this spectrum back to the broadcasters.  However, Maxwell 
believed that the broadcasters would not make full use of the 
spectrum, and they were able to maintain control of the spectrum 
only because of their political clout.  He was pessimistic that 
France would encourage a public debate about spectrum use since GOF 
officials preferred to have fewer constraints on their own decisions 
about spectrum allocation. 
 
Regulation of Next Generation Telecom Networks 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
4.(SBU)  Maxwell believed that, with the exception of Germany, the 
EU has already come to a consensus not/not to provide a regulatory 
holiday for next generation telecom networks, contrary to the policy 
adopted by the U.S.    Most European countries believed that 
regulating new digital fiber networks and copper telecom networks in 
the same way would ensure a level playing field and prevent market 
dominance.  Maxwell said that, in France, the ducts containing the 
fiber networks will likely be open for competitors to lay their 
lines, but ARCEP will not permit operators to have monopolies in 
various buildings.  The GOF will probably require telecom firms 
investing in fiber networks to lease their lines at a "reasonable" 
but not "extortionate" rate.  The policy would grant ARCEP a large 
amount of discretion to judge whether to provide access on a 
case-by-case basis. 
 
Internet Neutrality 
- - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶5. (SBU)  Europe will most likely adopt a policy consistent with 
existing FCC orders, Maxwell predicted.  France and most other EU 
Member States will not allow any internet service provider to "wall 
off" or prevent access to existing free internet sites.  However, 
internet service providers will be able to offer "premium packages" 
that allow video on demand, video downloads, faster services, or 
other improved services. 
 
Possibility of ARCEP and CSA Merging 
 
PARIS 00007511  002 OF 002 
 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶6. (SBU)  Although ARCEP was in charge of spectrum management, 
Maxwell explained, CSA handled spectrum allocated to broadcasters. 
Combining the two entities might result in a more rational 
management of spectrum.  However, the UK's experience shows that the 
merging of various regulators could be far more expensive and 
troublesome than envisioned.  Political consideration could always 
overrule these considerations, however. 
 
STAPLETON